Charter school vote surprises some state lawmakers
A first-term Danbury lawmaker introduced a surprise amendment to the legislative budget bill on Tuesday, sending the Appropriations Committee into an hourlong discussion on public education and underfunded urban school systems, before the majority Democrats finally rejected the maneuver.
Rep. Rachel Chaleski, a Republican who was elected in November, froze the committee with the amendment that would put the proposal for a 110-student charter school, which has been languishing for a half dozen years, into the twoyear $50.9 billion state budget.
“I was very disappointed to see in the budget that of the four approved charter schools, Danbury’s charter school was left out,” Chaleski said, detailing hours of testimony and support from the public and City Hall. “This is not a funding issue. It is a choice issue. It is an equity issue. A hundred and ten in a sea of 3,600 students at the state’s largest high school.”
Danbury’s GOP mayor agreed.“I am incredibly disappointed in the actions taken by the majority of the Appropriations Committee in not including funding for the Danbury Charter School, and then rejecting the amendment proposed by Danbury’s Representative Rachel Chaleski to include funding,” Dean Esposito said in a prepared statement.
On Wednesday, the planning team behind the Danbury Charter School said they were not defeated by the Tuesday vote and they remained “committed to getting the Danbury Charter School open this fall.”
“We were heartened to hear so many legislators — from both parties — speak favorably about parent choice and about our school in particular — including several who felt that they had to vote against Rep. Chaleski’s amendment for ‘procedural reasons,’” said Stephen Tracy, chair of the Danbury Charter School planning team. “In an effort to overcome the procedural concerns that prevented some of our school’s supporters from voting ‘yes’ yesterday, the Danbury Charter School Planning Team, alongside our many supporters in the community, will continue to press for inclusion in the state budget as the current legislative session continues.”
The scene in Hartford Tuesday played out when state Sen. Cathy Osten, DSprague, the co-chairwoman of the committee, immediately called for a 10-minute recess that stretched to 45 minutes, as several Democrats sided with the proposal during a closeddoor caucus. “This is an extremely unusual process in Appropriations, in particular in the budget, to call an amendment,” Osten said.
When the committee finally reconvened, an hourlong debate ensued and in the vote, four Democrats led by Sen. Doug McCrory, D-Hartford, co-chairman of the Education Committee, sided with the 16 Republicans on the committee in the final 33-20 vote against the proposal. “It might not be next year, but you’re going to have a school,” said McCrory, a school administrator.
“If you look at the history of education in this state, especially how it pertains to poor people, Black people, people who speak a second language, brown people, it’s embarrassing,” McCrory said. “This amendment, it’s probably not going to pass. I want to help the kids in Bridgeport. I want to help the kids in Bristol. I want to help the kids in New London. I want to help all the kids who are failing in traditional schools that we have had the data on for the last 35 years. If we’re not doing what’s best for Danbury, we’re not doing what’s best for the state.”
Currently, the second year of the committee’s budget includes $2.1 million for a Norwalk charter school; $4.75 million for a charter school in Middletown and $937,500 for a charter school in New Haven.
State Rep. Jeff Currey, DEast Hartford, said the overall problem is the state’s outdated, “disjointed” formula for funding public education, which lawmakers led by Speaker of the House Matt Ritter, DHartford hope to change with pending legislation. “We have not fixed the problem in front of us,” Currey said. “Our children deserve it, the children that attend all of our public schools around the state of Connecticut. Until we fix what we currently have, I cannot in good faith stand up and support an amendment, a surprise amendment.”
“I don’t think it’s best for Danbury,” said Sen. Julie Kushner, D-Danbury, who voted against the amendment. “It’s my view because I care about the children of
Danbury and our education system, and I think we need to make it better,” she said, noting that a contingent of Danbury residents was in attendance for the meeting in the Legislative Office Building. “I believe in the children of Danbury and I believe that they should have the best possible education.”
Rep. Susan Johnson, DWindham, noted that many suburban school districts are keeping out nearby city children by failing to participate in the Open Choice program. “Why are we not opening the borders between our towns?” asked the eighth-term lawmaker. “If we’re really that broadminded, we should be opening the borders between our towns and letting people go from one town to the next. We have a lot of vacancies in some of the suburban schools where they are really going to have to close some of those schools down. And a lot of places in the urban areas have overcrowding.”