Senate Bill (SB) 727, passed into law last year, allows any state-approved sponsor to authorize a charter school in Boone County (the Columbia area). Prior to SB 727, only charter schools in Kansas City Public Schools and St. Louis City Public Schools were explicitly permitted to have any sponsor.
As of today, no local school board has ever sponsored a charter school in their district, despite having the ability to do so. Until that trend is broken, the creation of charter schools depends on securing sponsorship from other state-approved entities, such as:
- 4-year universities;
- Community colleges;
- Private universities;
- Technical schools; or
- the Missouri Charter Public School Commission.
House Bill (HB) 1044 would expand charter access by allowing any state-approved sponsor to authorize a charter school in districts located within a charter county or in any municipality with greater than 30,000 inhabitants. This bill would be a major step toward increasing educational options, fostering competition, and driving innovation in Missouri.
Which School Districts Would HB 1044 Apply To?
Charter school expansion in this bill would be limited to school districts in or partly in St. Louis County, Kansas City, Jefferson County, Clay County, St. Charles County, St. Joseph, Springfield, Columbia, Joplin, Jefferson City, and Cape Girardeau. According to my analysis of the bill language, only around 60 school districts would be included.
It should be noted that if a district has been provisionally accredited (or unaccredited) for three consecutive years, any of the listed state-approved entities can sponsor a charter school in that district. Recently, the Missouri Charter Public School Commission created a charter school called the Leadership School in the provisionally accredited Normandy Schools Collaborative.
The Need to Create a Truly Choice-Rich Educational Marketplace
Expanding charter access is a good step, but it is only one part of building a stronger educational marketplace. Open enrollment is another necessary policy for our state, and it can actually amplify the potential benefits a charter school can bring.
For example, the Arizona Autism Charter Schools attract families from significant distances, with some parents commuting as far as 50 miles to access better services for their children. This opportunity exists partly due to Arizona’s open enrollment policies, which enable the charter to serve students across the entire region rather than just one district.
HB 1044 again moves Missouri in the right direction, but there should be no restrictions on where charter schools can operate. Of the 43 states with charter schools, Missouri is the only state without a rural charter. That needs to change, as educational entrepreneurs across the state should be able to go to the Missouri Charter Public School Commission if the local school district denies their application.
Missouri must build on last session’s momentum and create a stronger, more competitive, and more innovative educational landscape where every family can access high-quality options, no matter where they live.
