• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

Founders Library

  • Explore
    • Search
    • Timeline
      • National
      • California
      • Colorado
      • Massachusetts
      • Michigan
      • Minnesota
      • New Jersey
      • New York
    • Categories
    • Bookshelf
    • → Zero Chance of Passage

    • EXHIBITS
    • 30th Anniversary of Chartering
    • → Share Your Story
    • Peril and Promise
  • Who We Are
    • About the Library
    • Board of Advisors
      • Josephine Baker
      • Chris Barbic
      • Jim Blew
      • Derrell Bradford
      • Don Cooper
      • John Engler
      • Jim Goenner, Ph.D.
      • Howard Fuller, Ph.D.
      • Gary Hart
      • Ember Reichgott Junge
      • Ted Kolderie
      • Alex Medler, Ph.D.
      • William (Bill) F. Owens
      • Eric Premack
      • Nina Rees
      • Ricardo Soto
      • Roblin Webb
    • Meet the Founders
    • Charter History
    • News Blog
  • Get Involved
    • Ways to Get Involved
    • → Give
    • → Gather
    • → Share
    • Campaigns
    • → Founding Friends
    • → Get Your State on the Map
  • Contact Us
  • Donate

Letter to Albert Shanker 3-6-91

Albert ShankerTed Kolderie Legal and Legislative 1991 MN

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.”

Related

Footer

711 West Pickard Street, Suite M
Mount Pleasant, MI 48858

(989) 317-3510
contact@charterlibrary.org

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

Explore

  • Search
  • Timeline
  • Categories
  • Bookshelf

Who We Are

  • About the Library
  • Board of Advisors
  • Meet the Founders
  • Charter History
  • News Blog

Get Involved

  • Ways to Get Involved
  • Give
  • Gather
  • Share
  • All Campaigns
  • Founding Friends
  • Get Your State on the Map

Cart

Copyright © 2025 Charter Library · Site by LimeCuda · Sitemap