There are about 200 nonprofit charter schools in Pennsylvania, and they have been steeped in controversy ever since the General Assembly approved them 23 years ago.

Although most are publicly funded, charter schools are exempt from many of the requirements imposed by state and local school boards on curriculum and hiring.

The public has a love-hate relationship with these schools. Those who send their children there are, for the most part, staunch supporters, while those without children in these schools and others who have to pick up the tax bill to fund them are critical and consider them a drain on public schools.

That sentiment is echoed by many critics, including public school administrators and teachers. Even some legislators who gave charter schools the green light seem to be caught in the middle when trying to mollify both sides of this contentious issue.

Creators of charter schools believe that they increase learning opportunities and provide greater access to a quality education. Many also enjoy the choice they give their children within the public school system.

One of the biggest benefits, proponents say, is that teachers are often encouraged to think innovatively in contrast to the notion that many public school teachers are too traditional and don’t want to rock the boat.

The biggest concern with charter schools is the lack of accountability and transparency due mainly to a lack of local control because board members are appointed rather than elected as they are in traditional school districts.

Just like public schools, charter schools cannot charge tuition or impose special entrance requirements. Their students are generally admitted through a lottery process if demand exceeds the number of available spaces.

Charter schools generally receive a percentage of the per-pupil funds from the state and local school districts for operational costs based on enrollment. In most states, charter schools do not receive funds for facilities so they must rely on private donations. The federal government also provides revenues through educational grants and scholarships.

Charter schools are relatively new. The first was in Minnesota in 1991, but they have caught on as a viable alternative to public schools, especially in areas where the public schools are viewed as inferior.

Pennsylvania is among 44 states and the District of Columbia with charter schools. Since the General Assembly approved the legislation in 1997, Pennsylvania now has about 200 of these schools educating about 150,000 students, or about 10% of the total public school enrollment.

Charter schools have been characterized as “disruptive innovation,” which brings a smirk to the faces of local superintendents and members of the school boards trying to navigate the perilous waters of how to fund these schools without breaking the bank.

Panther Valley School Board members and retiring Superintendent Dennis Kergick aired some of their frustrations publicly at a recent meeting as they are trying to develop a 2020-21 budget that keeps school property taxes from continuing to go through the roof.

In developing its 2020-21 budget, the Allentown School District noted that its charter schools costs have quadrupled to $60 million in seven years, faster than anywhere else in the state, and asked the charters in the district to accept a subsidy cut to help balance the budget. The charters refused.

Last year, according to Lehighton School District Business Administrator Patricia Denicola, the district paid nearly $1.1 million for 81 students to attend outside cyber charter schools, nearly $60,000 for five students to attend brick-and-mortar charter schools and nearly $280,000 for 39 students who attended Lehighton’s Virtual Academy.

State Auditor General Eugene DePasquale was the first to sound the alarm about four years ago, calling Pennsylvania’s charter school law the “worst in the country.”

Gov. Tom Wolf has declared war and has pledged to push the General Assembly to make changes in accountability and funding rules for the charter school industry.

Wolf accused some charters of being “little more than fronts for private management companies.” He said the only innovations “involve finding new ways to take money out of the pockets of property taxpayers, like setting up sham online schools or exploiting a loophole in special education funding.”

In his 2020-21 budget message delivered earlier this month, Wolf recommends reducing the per-pupil amount districts must pay charter schools. The proposal would save traditional school districts about $280 million annually, Wolf said.

By Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com