In this March 1991 letter to Albert Shanker, Ted Kolderie outlines how a proposed Minnesota charter school bill addresses six key objections raised by California State Superintendent Bill Honig against the Chubb and Moe school choice model. Kolderie emphasizes that the bill is not a voucher-based, market-driven reform, but a contract-based approach that maintains accountability and public oversight. It avoids elitism, religious affiliation, and deregulation, instead offering a flexible pathway for innovation within public education. The core principle is simple: anyone can start a school—if they can earn a charter from a responsible public authority
Transcript
Outline
I. Context
- Enclosure of Honig’s critique of the Chubb/Moe plan.
- Introduction of a Minnesota bill in both houses.
II. The Bill’s Safeguards
- No elite academies (Subdivision 9).
- No cult schools; system is discretionary, not market-based (Subdivision 3).
- No religious institutions (Subdivision 8).
- No unregulated ‘free’ market; schools remain accountable to sponsoring bodies (Subdivision 3).
- No forced decentralization; existing schools may voluntarily become charters (Subdivisions 3 & 4).
- No increased public spending or private school takeovers; existing aid remains intact (Section 2).
III. Key Principle
- Innovation within public education is possible.
- A charter can be granted to “whoever can persuade a responsible governmental body.”
