The Massachusetts Charter Public School Association is deeply concerned about a number of proposals within the Senate Ways and Means version of the Education Reform bill. While we share the overall goal to expand charter public schools, there are provisions that would undermine this goal.

These provisions would inhibit charter growth, and restrain the ability of successful charters to continue to provide the educational and economic opportunities they have been providing for 15 years - a key tenet of the education reform agenda.

The Senate Ways and Means version of the bill contains proposals that will:

Create a separate and potentially unequal funding system for charter school students.

Significantly restrict and stifle charter school growth and innovation. Establish unworkable enrollment application quotas.

Impose counterproductive rules related to student attrition.

The bill decouples approximately 20 percent of total funding for all charter public schools from Chapter 70 funding, including 100 percent in first-year funding for new charters, and puts it in a separate line-item. This sets up one way to fund district students and a separate and possibly unequal way to fund charter students, who are predominantly minority and poor. This provision will have a chilling effect on new charter applicants, contributing a further restriction on charter school growth and innovation.

Charter schools must enroll students, hire staff and secure private financing for facilities well before the state budget is enacted to prepare for the start of school. Requiring a direct appropriation to fund charter expansion will ensure an annual fight over every dollar against very powerful opponents. Without an assured revenue stream, based on the Chapter 70 per-pupil funding formula, charter schools will have no choice but to defer any growth plans.

Language in the bill would effectively place a moratorium on new charters. The bill mandates that the first three charters awarded in any given year must be in districts that rank in the bottom 10 percent on MCAS. A second provision says only successful charter operators can apply for these charters. On average, only two or three charters get awarded each year. Last year, only one was awarded. The net effect will be to severely limit where charters can locate and who can apply for them.

Charter public schools already serve a far higher percentage of minorities and low-income families, and an equivalent number of special needs children compared to district schools. Nonetheless, the bill proposes that charter schools set annual goals to attract children from certain demographic groups to more closely match the demographic makeup of their host districts.

While we agree with the overall goal of attracting more underserved children, the language puts our schools in a Catch-22. Under federal discrimination laws, parents are not required to divulge this information on enrollment forms and charters cannot require this type of disclosure. Charters would be held accountable for information they could not collect, exposing them to sanctions.

In attempting to address the "attrition" issue, the legislation imposes regulations that would actually increase attrition. The bill requires charters to fill vacancies up to the 12th grade. While the intent is to offer opportunities to attend charters to as many students as possible, the language would not solve the problem.

If such a policy is implemented, it will be unfair and disruptive to both the students filling the vacated seats and the existing charter students. Students entering these high performing charter schools are usually at least two or three years behind their peers in academic preparation. This will force the schools to demote the student to a lower grade or hold them back at the end of the year. Many, if not all, of these students, when faced with such an action will choose to return to the district schools thus increasing the attrition rate, creating a churning of students and a serious disruption in the educational environment.

We have been encouraged by the yearlong movement by state leaders to endorse the concept of lifting restrictions on charter growth. The association has filed several amendments we hope will be adopted that will accomplish what the legislation seeks to accomplish without jeopardizing the funding or the operation of existing schools, or compromise the original intent of the legislation. MARC KENEN is executive director of the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association.