Summary of Louisiana’s Charter School Funding Lawsuit
Iberville Parish School Board et al. v. State of Louisiana, BESE, et al., No. 633193, Sec.
25 consolidated with Louisiana Association of Educators, et al. v. State of Louisiana, et
al., No. 633874, Sec.25
Louisiana’s Funding Background:
Louisiana’s public schools are funded via the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP),
whereby state and local funds are equitably distributed on a per pupil basis amongst a
variety of public schools—i.e., traditional schools, charter schools, university laboratory
schools, etc. For locally authorized charter schools, the local school board serves as the
Local Education Agency (LEA) and distributes the state and local portions of the MFP to
those schools. However, the funding for state-authorized charter schools (a.k.a. “Type
2” charter schools) is slightly different in that these schools, which are their own LEAs,
receive only state funding through the MFP— the formula does not actually transfer the
local portion. Instead, the Type 2 charter school receives the state portion and a “local
representative” portion made up of state funds for the amount each enrolled student
would have received if he/she attended a local district school and an equivalent amount
is withheld from the sending districts’ total state portion. In other words, the funding
formula shifts state dollars so that a student receives approximately the same amount in
total MFP funding regardless of whether he/she attends a traditional public school or a
Type 2 charter school and the MFP costs are equitably distributed between the state
and local districts.
Plaintiffs’ Claims:
In September 2014, a local district (Iberville Parish School Board) filed a lawsuit against
the state, challenging the constitutionality of the current MFP structure for funding Type
2 charter schools. Soon thereafter, a state teachers’ union organization (the Louisiana
Association of Educators—LAE) filed a similar lawsuit and the two suits were eventually
consolidated into one before the 19th Judicial District Court. Collectively, the plaintiffs
argued:
1. That the constitution only permits traditional local school districts to directly
receive MFP funds and as such, Type 2 schools should only be funded via
general or specific legislative appropriations (which do not receive the same level
of budget protections as MFP funds).
a. Note: similar arguments had been successfully made a few years prior in
a lawsuit that challenged the ability of private schools to directly receive
MFP funds for the state’s voucher program.
2. Even if Type 2 charter schools are permitted to directly receive MFP funds,
plaintiffs contended that the MFP formula unlawfully considers the amount of
local funds raised by a district and that any withholdings from a district’s total
state portion of the MFP is unconstitutional.
a. In essence, the plaintiffs argued that the funding of students who attend
Type 2 charter schools should be akin to those who attend a private
school—i.e., that no amount of money should be withheld from districts for
students who enroll in a school outside the purview of that board’s
jurisdiction and that the funding for those students should be the full
burden of the state with no financial consequence to the sending district.
LAPCS’ Actions:
Recognizing the major funding threat to Type 2 charter schools, as well as the overall
threat to the Louisiana charter school community and movement, the Louisiana
Association of Public Charter Schools (LAPCS) intervened as defendants to assist the
State, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), and the Louisiana
Department of Education in defending against plaintiffs’ claims. By intervening, we were
able to coordinate litigation efforts and strategies with the various state attorneys in
order to optimize our strengths. The state attorneys focused their arguments on the
state’s right to create an equitable, student-based formula that ensures funding for all
public schools, and our attorneys were able to focus on the evolving landscape of public
education and the lawful existence of Type 2 charter schools as public school
alternatives for families, as well as emphasize the direct, negative impact these stateauthorized charter schools would endure if MFP funding did not, in essence, follow the
child to his or her school of choice.
District Court Outcome:
After a long, three-day trial in March and many submitted post-trial briefs, the District
Court ruled against the plaintiffs on May 15, 2015, holding that the plaintiffs did not meet
their extremely high burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the
Constitution somehow prohibits or restricts the state from funding Type 2 charter
schools through the current politically insulated mechanism of the MFP. According to
the Court:
1. The Constitution mandates BESE to create a formula that funds all public
schools and because Type 2 charter schools are in fact public schools (unlike the
private schools that participate in the voucher program), they may receive funds
through BESE’s determined and adopted formula—the MFP.
2. The Constitution requires BESE to equitably allocate the funds, and equitable
does not mean equal—so no school or district should expect to receive the same
exact amount of funding as another, especially since BESE’s formula takes into
consideration the disparities of wealth between the many districts in Louisiana.
3. The MFP formula must consider contributions to it by every city and parish
school system. And even though charter schools do not have the ability to tax,
they may still be included in a formula contributed to by other systems.
Therefore, BESE may consider the local monies raised by districts when
determining the total amount of money owed to the Type 2 charter schools for
enrolled students.
Next Steps:
So far, both Iberville Parish School Board and LAE have given notice of their intent to
appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals and we are currently awaiting the briefing
schedules. However, given the significance of this case in terms of the constitutional
limitations on the state, if any, to create and implement the MFP formula and fund nontraditional public schools, we anticipate this issue will ultimately be raised before the
state supreme court.
For More Information:
Local News Article, Trial Recap:
http://theadvocate.com/news/11758683-123/bese-president-testifies-states-mfp
Local News Article, Court Ruling:
http://theadvocate.com/news/12385463-123/baton-rouge-judge-rules-use
LAPCS’ Press Release:
http://lacharterschools.org/news-and-events/press-releases/145-type-2-charter-schoolswin-battle-for-state-funding-student-based-funding-formula-upheld
LAPCS’ Lawsuit FAQ for Parents:
LAPCS’ Funding Lawsuit Frequently Asked Questions
Court Filings:
Iberville’s Petition
LAE’s Petition
LAPCS’ Petition of Intervention
Iberville’s Post-Trial Brief
LAE’s Post-Trial Brief
State’s Post-Trial Brief
LAPCS’ Post-Trial Brief