This just makes sense. What drives me crazy about charter school proponents is that we already have many examples of schools which have unique programs and are under the control of school districts. Tacoma's School of the Arts comes to mind and Bremerton's West Hills STEM Academy. Even, Valley View, the elementary school I went to near SeaTac the seventies, had much the feel of a charter school. Why not work with the school districts to create innovative schools rather than trying to go around them?

http://www.tacoma.k12.wa.us/Schools/hs/P…

http://www.bremertonschools.org/Domain/1…

Time to end the use of money collected from sales taxes on the poor to pay for "separate but equal" charter schools for the rich.

Thanks for the update. This is good news indeed. I wonder if the Wall Street Public School Tax Theft Project (aka Charter School Reform Movement) will push for a constitutional amendment if they lose on appeals. And kudos to the writers of these constitutional provisions for protecting public education.

I take issue with Will in Seattle's statement that charter schools are for the rich. I view them more as private schools for the poor (having used an amazing charter school in California for my oldest son). They managed to give him the flexibility and attention that the public school's couldn't which is the only reason he's a proper high school graduate rather than a GED recipient.

@4,

I'm glad for your son that he won the charter school lottery (most charter schools underperform public schools), but most aren't so lucky.

According to the Times article what is being denied is "state construction money". So perhaps they are not saying they are excluded from all revenue...just money that would be used to say build a maintain a new school building?

The Vancouver Columbia and Seattle PI stories have the same headline: "Judge: Washington charter school law unconstitutional." Both are the Associated Press version. The Spokane Spokesman Review has "Judge: Charter school law unconstitutional" but does not credit the AP.

Tacoma News Tribune: "Judge upholds most of state charter school law." However, the article is from the Seattle Times.

@ 7 The "common school fund" is construction money. The "state tax for common schools" is the entire state portion of the property tax.

Times story has been taken down. Call 911 tell them to send a Vet. Lynne Varner is having a cow in editorial offices.

From the Attorney General-The court has held the vast majority of the charter schools initiative constitutional, and the state will continue to implement this law

It seems that charter schools can still be created, overseen by the state board, etc., But without public funds how are they different from private schools?

@6 How many children do you actually know who have gone to charter schools? I just wonder if you are parroting some statistic you read somewhere or if you have first hand real world experience. I know at least 5 kids who were struggling in public schools and were successful in a charter school. I think the important thing is to be well placed and the model of many charter schools caters better to kids with particular learning challenges, such as ADD. When I sent my son down to California after he failed at Ballard, it wasn't a lottery. I knew where he was going and had seen their results first hand on my nephews.

I also have 12 years of experience with kids in the Seattle School District in various schools and the only one I've ever been happy with is Salmon Bay which is one of the alternative schools.

Screw you Corporate Amerika!!!

For me, it is not that all Charter schools are bad. Some of them are, some of them aren't. Just like public schools. What I object to is my tax dollars going to for profit. I would rather that we kept the money in the public schools and worked more in getting great alternative schools through the public school system, like many that we have now. Have more alternative classrooms. Try different ways of teaching. The public school can be innovative. Invest in the schools we have now!

@14- The Seattle alternative schools are proof that the Charter School movement is unnecessary. The fact that there's 30 years of evidence that the charters don't perform better than public schools in general. Yes, some kids in some schools did better in a charter. And other kids did worse. In general, they did the same... The sole achievement of charter schools is that teachers are paid less. They haven't brought costs down in general, they've simply created more administrative costs.

@13,

Yes I'm "parroting" statistics, because what exactly is the use of anecdotes when discussing public policy? How's this for anecdotes? I went to phenomenal public schools that educated me and my classmates exceptionally well, albeit in California. It's also interesting that you mentioned kids with special requirements since charter schools frequently do whatever they can to keep problematic kids from walking through their doors.

Although I'm certainly curious how you managed to con the state of California into educating your son. Don't you think an actual California state resident was entitled to that education? Considering how little taxes you pay in this state, you got an amazing deal.

@1 - Because hedge fund managers don't profit off public schools. Just charter schools. Where else can you get public money, take over a public building and pay no rent on it, make the school district pay your utilities on the public building you took over, pay teachers crap but reward yourself and your "investors" handsomely, and refuse to turn over documents to the state to be audited to ensure public dollars are being used appropriately?

http://www.alternet.org/education/who-pr…

http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/12/0…

This ruling is almost meaningless. The case will be decided in the Supreme Court and nowhere else.

This is my take on it.

What the court ruling on charter schools means for the state of Washington, so far,
http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com….

Dora Taylor

The Seattle Times is desperate to:

1) Eliminate free, universal public education and help prepare the way for corporate control of our schools as the alternative.

2) Eliminate the estate tax---which would further concentrate wealth in even fewer hands, creating an even bigger gap between the to 1% and the rest of us---and substitute it with...nothing.

3) Eliminate any and all labor unions, regulatory groups, citizen oversight and most of all, real investigative journalism.

Remember, this is the paper that claims to be "focused on education". Yet, when Diane Ravitch, the preeminent education writer in the country, and the former Undersecretary of the Federal Department of Education, came to town, the Seattle Times, in a truly bizarre, quasi-Stalinist process, never wrote one word about the Ravitch visit, AND DID NOT EVEN MENTION HER NAME!

(The Times DID make mention of her then upcoming speech at UW on a community events calendar that someone placed there in late August: then, even THAT was excised---by edict?---from their site a few days before Ravitch arrived in town.)

In contrast, when Michelle "I Love To Make Money Off Of Our Children" Rhee---the "Queen of Education Privatization" came to town to promote HER book, the Seattle Times gave her an interview with the Times editorial staff and MULTIPLE stories, including a "glamour/Model Wannabee shot" of "Michelle, looking out at the city, off of the Queen Anne Hill lookout" and much more.

They always covered Ravitch---albeit in a very unfair and biased way---in the past, however. I guess the Top Brass at the Seattle Times decided that since they had nothing factual to use against Ravitch, and the ad hominem attacks didn't work either, their best "strategic move" was to simply ignore her. Pretend she doesn't exist.

It didn't work, someone should tell Lynn Varner---who appears to ALWAYS be auditioning for her next gig, at the Gates Foundation---and the Blethen family. Your candidate, Suzanne Estey, got her butt kicked despite your very best efforts to slander her opponent, Sue Peters.