LOS ANGELES _ California is home to about one out of every five charter schools in the United States, but state oversight of them is far from a national model.
Since the Charter Schools Act of 1992 was passed more than a quarter-century ago, a political standoff in Sacramento has made it almost impossible to repair even the parts of the charter law that no one disputes are broken.
Even though Democrats have a firm grip on the Legislature, they are not united on charter schools. Torn between allegiances to pro-charter philanthropists and the powerful teachers union, lawmakers have for years begun each legislative session by introducing a handful of bills favorable to one side or the other. Many have died in committee. Those that have made it to a governor's desk often have been vetoed.
With the arrival of Gov. Gavin Newsom, there are signs that the gridlock is ending.
Shortly after he was sworn in, Newsom instructed lawmakers to fast-track charter legislation that politicians had been arguing over for years. The law he signed in February makes charter schools subject to the same public records, open meeting and conflict-of-interest laws that apply to traditional public schools.
"Leadership matters. Who is at the top matters," said state Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino, who chairs the Senate Education Committee. "We have a new governor who is interested in transparency, he's interested in these issues and he wanted to make it happen."
How far Newsom will go to tighten regulation of charters remains to be seen, however _ and there's reason to be cautious in predicting legislative support.
For 27 years, the teachers union and pro-charter advocates have been fighting a custody battle over California's public schoolchildren and the state funding that follows them.
Although the California Teachers Association and the California Charter Schools Association insist that they are willing to negotiate with each other, there has been scant evidence of cooperation. Both organizations have spent millions to sway public opinion far beyond Sacramento. In charter-packed L.A. and Oakland, school board elections have become proxy wars.
The result mostly has been policy paralysis. With the exception of a few tweaks around the edges, charters' regulatory framework has remained frozen in amber _ a reflection of ideas that made sense more than two decades ago, when the schools were new and rare.
The two sides have rejected even each others' most modest suggestions for change. At times, each has pushed aggressive measures wholly unacceptable to the other when compromise might have been possible.
Neither has fought for the kind of change that experts say could be most meaningful _ stronger regulations that are already in place in many other states.
"There's been almost no political action to think about how we can do this better," said UCLA education professor John Rogers.
