Seventeen years ago, a group of black parents, the school district, the U.S. Justice Department and others came to an agreement that was intended to put the funding of school desegregation programs forever in the hands of city taxpayers.
Now, they say, the state has violated the agreement by indirectly sending more than $42 million of desegregation money over 10 years to charter schools 鈥 money they say should be returned.
It鈥檚 an argument filed in an that has touched a nerve among charter school parents and organizers, who could potentially lose their schools if the plaintiffs prevail.
People are also reading…
Charter school supporters have begun a social media campaign urging Superintendent Kelvin Adams to 鈥淒rop the Suit.鈥 A parody Twitter account for Adams began sending out sarcastic apologies for attempting to bankrupt the city鈥檚 35 charter schools. District officials on Monday were working to have the account taken down.
鈥淚f they win this, it will be devastating,鈥 said Marshall Cohen, executive director of Lift For Life Academy, a middle and high school and the oldest charter school in the city. 鈥淲e wouldn鈥檛 be able to continue.鈥
The action is not a lawsuit against charter schools. It is a motion that seeks to enforce the terms of a 43-year-old case that involved concerned parents 鈥 known as the Liddell plaintiffs 鈥 who sued on behalf of their children seeking desegregation in 50度灰视频 schools.
The , the NAACP, the Liddell plaintiffs, the U.S. Justice Department and others who were involved in crafting the 1999 desegregation settlement agreement that grew from that lawsuit.
That year, voters approved a 2/3-cent sales tax to pay for what had become the most expensive school desegregation plan in the nation. called for $60 million from the sales tax and resulting state aid to go to the district. The tax revenue was intended for district programs specified in the settlement agreement, such as magnet schools, full-day kindergarten, preschool and interdistrict busing for black students to predominantly white suburban schools.
The agreement, approved by then-District Judge Stephen Limbaugh, named the tax as a condition of his approval.
鈥淔urthermore, the revenues generated by the sales tax shall be paid directly to, or assigned by the Transitional District to City Board,鈥 s, referencing the district and the board that governs it.
Honoring voters
The litigation is 鈥渘ot an attack on charters,鈥 said Adolphus Pruitt, president of the 50度灰视频 NAACP, who is among the plaintiffs. It鈥檚 an attempt 鈥渢o honor the wishes of voters when they approved the sales tax,鈥 he added.
鈥淭he quagmire in all this is how the state funds poor school districts, and schools that have underserved populations,鈥 Pruitt said. 鈥淧oor kids in the public schools and poor kids in the charter schools shouldn鈥檛 have to fight one another for money. If anything, we should be fighting together to get the state to step up to the plate.鈥
The dispute centers around actions taken by the Missouri Legislature when it recast the way the state finances public schools.
In 2006, the Legislature enacted a new funding formula that determines how the state distributes money school districts and charter schools. And since that point, attorneys involved in the desegregation case argue, 50度灰视频 Public Schools annually has been shorted part of the revenue generated by the sales tax.
Eddie Roth, an attorney and director of the city鈥檚 Department of Human Services, questions the school district鈥檚 calculations.
He argues that the desegregation money has always been, and continues to be, collected solely for use by 50度灰视频 Public Schools, according to the district鈥檚 own filings.
The only thing that changed, Roth wrote in a Facebook posting, is how the 2006 funding formula regarded that local desegregation money.
Under the new formula, desegregation dollars counted against the state aid available for 50度灰视频 Public Schools. Since 50度灰视频 charter schools draw from that same allotment of state funds, the district appears to be arguing that charter schools have enjoyed a bigger slice of the pie than they would have without the local desegregation money.
Roth said the litigation raises more questions than it answers. He urged district officials to explain themselves.
鈥淕iven the high stakes to this, the school district has the responsibility to be crystalline in what it鈥檚 doing and why it is doing it,鈥 he said.
鈥楥reating great options鈥
Charter school officials say the litigation caught them off guard.
On the , a signed letter by the Special Administrative Board states that it has been in the works for some time.
鈥淭his litigation is the result of almost eight years of unsuccessfully working with the State to get it to live up to its promises and contractual obligations of the 1999 Desegregation Settlement Agreement,鈥 it says.
Richard Sullivan, president of the SAB, about the issue in 2008. The most recent correspondence was this winter, when the SAB warned of litigation if the matter was not resolved.
鈥淭he District鈥檚 stance on partnerships and relationships with charter schools remains unchanged,鈥 the letter states. 鈥淲e remain focused on creating great options for the young people of our community.鈥
In the past, the tables have been turned. Charter schools have been the plaintiffs in litigation about underfunding, successfully claiming they didn鈥檛 receive adequate revenue from 50度灰视频 Public Schools when the district controlled their revenue prior to 2006.
In January, Confluence Academy filed a lawsuit against the Missouri Board of Education arguing it had been shorted $2.5 million. Two other schools 鈥 50度灰视频 Charter (now Premier Charter School) and Lift For Life 鈥 successfully made the argument in 2009 when they sued the state and claimed 50度灰视频 Public Schools withheld from them millions of dollars in property and sales taxes.
The two charter schools won the case. In the 2014-15 school year, the district paid the schools $6.3 million.
But charter school supporters say the district鈥檚 litigation has eroded their trust with the district.
Since his arrival in 2008, Adams has steadily built bridges with the charter school community by fostering a partnership with KIPP 50度灰视频 and allowing the charter school network to use two district school buildings.
The district worked tangentially with charter schools to build support for Proposition 1 鈥 a 75-cent increase to the property tax levy approved by voters this month that will generate about $28 million annually. A third of the funding would go to charters, because they enroll about one-third of public school children in the city.
鈥淚 thought the relationship was building and improving,鈥 said Doug Thaman, executive director of the Missouri Charter Public School Association. 鈥淏ut this 鈥 this is going after every single charter school.鈥
Thaman鈥檚 organization is working on an analysis to determine how much money each charter school would have to repay if the district were to succeed.
Returning just one year of the revenue from the tax would be difficult, said Jeff Kuntze, chief operating officer for Confluence Academies. Ten years would be impossible, he added.
鈥淲e鈥檙e all taking notice and are quite concerned,鈥 he said. 鈥淭he dollar amounts we鈥檙e talking about are massive.鈥