Representatives of Ohio’s largest school districts are opposing a proposal in the state’s two-year budget that they say would force them to close some public school buildings.
The proposal would bolster Ohio’s unused facilities statute. District officials said they would be forced to sell those properties to charter or private schools for less than market value.
“We have to focus on making sure that local districts have control over our own property,” Cleveland.com quoted John Stoddard, superintendent of Geauga County’s Berkshire Local Schools. “Only local voters and the school board should have the authority to determine how our investments in our school buildings are used.”
However, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute had a different take on the push. From their perspective, it comes down to flouting or following state law.
“Under current law, districts must first offer these buildings to charter and STEM schools before repurposing or selling them,” the institute’s vice president for Ohio Policy, said in a blog post. “It’s a reasonable and longstanding policy—one rooted in fairness and fiscal responsibility. Yet some district administrators are objecting, not because the state’s expectation will change, but because they would actually be held accountable for following the law.”
According to the Fordham Institute, the state’s law has been on the books since 2013.
“For too long, Ohio’s traditional public schools have treated the state’s facility disposition law as optional—sidestepping their obligation to offer unused buildings to public charter schools,” the post added. “The governor’s proposals aren’t radical or punitive; they’re long-overdue, sensible fixes that reinforce the intent of the law.”
According to the Fordham Institute, House members removed the governor’s language from the biennium budget bill. However, state senators appear to embrace the idea, making school officials nervous.
“We would have to evict kids out of those buildings and place them elsewhere so that organizations from outside our community would be able to come in and purchase those schools for less than what we paid for them and less than what we have invested in them,” Ideastream quoted Canton City School District Superintendent Jeff Talbert.
“They want smaller, neighborhood schools that the kids can stay there from K through 6th grade, and they did that by increasing their taxes, and we are building those buildings,” Talbert added. “But if those buildings come up a little shy in enrollment, we are going to have to give those buildings away. It just doesn’t seem right to me, and I know it doesn’t seem right to our community.”
In speaking with Ideastream, the law affords other types of schools, whether charter or private schools, a way to buy needed facilities. The problem is that public school officials and proponents generally oppose different types of schools.
“The problem is that the law for some time has said that if a district is not using a building that it needs to be sold,” Ideastream quoted Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. “And that way, a charter school, another school, a private school, would be able to buy that. That’s what the law is.
“There’s been some practical problems, frankly, serious allegations that some of these schools are literally holding on to this property for no other reason than to stop them, some competition,” the governor added. “So that’s what the issue is.”
Earlier this month, the Auditor of State’s Office launched new financial health indicators for Ohio’s schools. The office said the indicators would paint a more complete picture of school districts’ financial trends and identify potential issues. Most cities, counties, and school districts have at least one “critical” or “cautionary” indicator.
