By Kevin Monahan

There is an ongoing heated debate about the value of Charter schools that gets it share of news coverage. Two main topics include the debate of equitable funding and the recent Department of Education orders to close two Charter Schools that have been described as under performing and demonstrated some type of failed management. Many Boston Public School supporters point to these situations as reasons to argue that Charter Schools should be legislatively capped and that they are unsuccessful institutions. I consider myself a big proponent of Boston Public Schools but come to a completely different conclusion.

For too long, Boston Public Schools enjoyed a monopoly. Charter schools have introduced them to competition. As a consumer of education and someone who pays for it as a tax payer, I welcome the competition. Bring it on!

My wife and I have donated a great deal of time as volunteers and advocates for Public Education for the past five years. Our efforts are equivalent to a part time job without the pay but a great deal of satisfaction. In our opinion, our efforts have been fruitful. It is something we are glad to do.

While doing so, there are persisting policy flaws that prove frustrating. Central to this frustration is the assignment policy that restricts parental choice and is inhibitive to parental involvement. The BPS assignment policy does not allow more than 50% of the seats at a school to be allocated to those in the walk zone of the school. This is 50% of what is "left over" after programmatic seat allocations including Special Education and English Language Learners. This results in a restriction of less than 50% walk to school families. The Murphy School is restricted to 40%. Some argue this "choice restriction" is needed to maintain "choice" and make schools "diverse".

BPS has failed to recognize that one of the main "choices" a parent would like to have is the "choice" to walk to school and not subject their child (including kindergartners) to spending hours being transported on a bus across town. Charter schools understand this. They do not discriminate against a family by restricting their choice due to the family's proximity to a school. This may be a part of the explanation why the Charter school population continues to grow and BPS enrollment continues to decline.

It may also explain the difference in the level of parental involvement in the schools. Charter school families have showed significant family involvement while the BPS district family involvement is anemic. The Murphy school is relatively healthy as far as involvement. However, an overwhelming majority of our most active parents reside in the walk zone. Common sense may point to the obvious logistical benefits of being able to get to a school that is within your community instead of one that is across town.

BPS ignores the common sense approach and continues its traditional solution of asking for more programs and more tax dollars. Yes home owners, your tax bills are expected to increase 10% soon.

A well guarded secret is the recent announcement of the "Family Engagement" branch of the Superintendent's office recommending paying "parent liaisons" at the tune of an additional $7,000,000. Apparently the 2006 BPS budget of $719,000,000 is not enough to get parents involved in their child's education.

In takes a Ph.D. to come up with this approach. I would prefer to listen to the common sense recommendations of a single mother who lacks transportation to get across town to a parent council meeting and waits in freezing weather for a bus drop off at multiple bus stops for her children.

This steadily ballooning budget, coinciding with a steadily declining enrollment, includes a whopping busing cost of almost $70 million. This involves burning over 1.3 million gallons of gasoline and transporting our students 9 million miles annually. The petroleum industry is grateful. So is the bus driver's union which showed up in force during the assignment policy discussions demanding "no changes" in the assignment policy.

To be fare, some busing is required for programs that are not evenly distributed throughout the district such as Special Education and English Language Learners. However, $28 million of the busing cost is a direct consequence of the current "Controlled Choice" policy restricting the walk to school seats at a 50% level. That is a lot of books and supplies.

As for the "diversity" argument, the district has become more racially and socio-economically segregated since the implementation of forced busing which was intended for de-segregation purposes. The BPS district enrollment is 85% non-white and 75% poor as defined by those receiving free and reduced lunch. Several schools are more than 90% non-white. This is hardly representative of the city of Boston. BPS has become the choice of last resort for the consumers of education.

Councilor Turner is the biggest opponent of changing the 50% restriction and of the concept of community schools. He cites "inequities" within the district without substantiating the claim. An "inequity" he fails to mention is the exception to the rule where the new schools are allowed 75% wall to school preference. This includes the Orchard Gardens School where he sits on the Board of Trustees. Apparently "Neighborhood" schools are okay for his back yard, but not for others. As for his concern for "diversity", Orchards Garden opened up with a population that was 98% non-white.

Its time to recognize the real "New Boston" and get past an obsolete and failed assignment policy. Demographics and housing has progressed and changed in the past 30 years. BPS assignment policy has not. Ironically, almost all schools in Boston would be more racially diverse if all were allowed to walk to school.

Ironically, BPS alone makes a great argument to look at more Charter Schools. Bring it on!

Kevin Monahan is a Dorchester resident and parent who has been active in Boston Public School policies. He recently worked on the School Committee Quality Work Group report. He is a parent representative on the Murphy School Site Council, officer on the Parent School Council, and initiator of the Murphy School K-8 conversion.