Candidates for state superintendent of public instruction hold strikingly varied positions on the expansion of charter schools in Washington.
As a result of a voter-approved initiative in 2012, 15 Washington charter schools currently serve around 5,000 students in the state. Though the state charter school commission can’t issue any more charters to open more schools, interest in charter schools has grown around the nation.
Between the 2010-11 and 2021-22 school years, the number of charter schools in the nation grew from 5,300 to 7,800 as enrollment doubled in the same timeline, from 1.8 million to 3.7 million students.
The 15 charter schools in Washington serve around 5,000 students, compared with more than 1 million public school pupils in the 2,400 public schools.
With some exceptions, charter schools operate outside of public school districts but are funded by the state, receiving the same funding as public schools based on enrollment. They’re barred from collecting school levy dollars or state match for facility needs for which public schools qualify.
Unlike a public school district’s locally elected board of directors, a charter school’s board isn’t elected.
Charter schools are exempt from some state curriculum requirements and other standards, which provide them more flexibility in tailoring their schooling to meet niche needs. Innovation High School near downtown Spokane, for example, boasts an emphasis on project-based learning opportunities. Downtown charter Lumen High School serves teen parents, offering wraparound supports and a built-in early learning center for child care.
Charter schools have higher proportions of lower-income students and students of color than their public school counterparts, according to a 2024 report from the state Board of Education. Around 62% of charter school students identify as students of color, compared to the 50% in public schools. Low -income students make up around 60% of charter school populations and 50% in public schools.
The same report found that these students perform better in charter schools than traditional public schools.
The four state superintendent candidates express differing opinions on school choice — including charter schools — in Washington. The candidates differ in their support for alternative education models such as charter schools and school voucher programs.
State Republican Party-endorsed candidate David Olson supports charter schools, and advocates for more funding and a greater number of charter schools in the state.
“Struggling students should have options, and charter schools allow them to have options, especially children of color and in high poverty areas,” Olson said.
He advocates for opening more charter schools in the state, especially in public school districts facing school closures like Seattle Public Schools, facing budget shortage and looking to close up to 20 elementary schools. He proposed turning those schools into charter schools so that students could stay in their familiar neighborhood schools.
Olson proposed that charter schools should qualify for taxes collected under school district levies. He envisioned a system in which public school districts would include nearby charter schools in their levy asks and make this clear to their voters.
He said just as public schools should see more state funding, charter schools’ allotment should also increase. There are far fewer charter schools than public schools, he says, so he expects it should be feasible to fund.
“It’s not going to overwhelm the public school system to have charter schools getting a little extra to help them be successful, especially if it’s going to improve educational outcomes for BIPOC students and high poverty students,” Olson said, using the acronym for Black, Indigenous and people of color.
Asked whether he would support the state sending vouchers to families to pay for tuition at private or religious schools, he said it would depend on the legislation, but he’s not opposed to it.
“I support options,” Olson said. “So, I would say I would keep all my options open.”
Libertarian-leaning candidate John Patterson Blair touts the most drastic positions on school choice in Washington, as outlined in the voters’ guide in the last 20 years he’s ran for this office. His goal, he said, isn’t to win the race but to use it as a platform for his proposed “new foundation” of public education based entirely on school vouchers.
Students would receive trust accounts with the amount the state would pay for their education based on their apportionment in the state’s funding model. Last year, the state paid an average $18,000 per pupil, with different allocations whether a student was in special education or low income, for example.
Parents then could use this trust to pay tuition at a registered school of their choice. He said this would give them more freedom to tailor their schooling to fit their needs, specializing in science or music or a project-based option, for example.
“There’s a real advantage to studying on your own,” Blair said earlier this month. “Say you want to do violin, you hire a violin teacher for an hour or two a week at 200 bucks an hour, and you’re getting really great training. The idea is to give individuals control and they aren’t penalized for failure.”
Incumbent Chris Reykdal’s educational philosophy is based on the assertion that the collective contributes to public schooling for the benefit of all children. As such, he vehemently opposes expanding charter schools and school vouchers in Washington.
He said that since charter school boards aren’t locally elected like public school district boards, they aren’t held accountable to the citizens whose taxes fund the schools.
“I just think it’s unbelievable that taxpayer money can be spent by a group of people privately appointed, no direct appointment by the governor, nothing by my office, not elected by voters,” he said.
To him, promoting school choice means families have options within the public school system rather than the choice to use taxes at any educational entity.
“Ultimately, for kids, I want them to have lots of options within that public system, but I do not believe it is a personal entitlement because that gets really dangerous,” he said.
He compared the school voucher argument that parents should receive checks to pay for their child’s education individually to other areas of government. Rather than pay taxes into our system of national defense, individuals might buy their own weaponry and alarm systems, he pondered. Or individuals might receive a voucher and were responsible for putting out their own fires, rather than calling emergency services.
“I promise you it would destroy these public systems,” Reykdal said.
He questioned the data indicating students’ success, mentioning a possible selection bias in the higher performance.
“If you’re a family that’s pulled to come to this school where they’re gonna focus on math and science, well you probably got kids very inclined to be math- and science -focused,” he reasoned.
Political newcomer and nonprofit founder Reid Saaris shares Reykdal’s disapproval of vouchers and wants to continue seeing how the 2012 initiative allowing charter schools in Washington “plays out,” he said.
He said he understands the desire for families to remove their kids from public schools, dissatisfied with the challenges schools face in budgeting, low achievement scores and student mental health for which he faults Reykdal’s leadership.
Saaris said unlike the incumbent, he is aware of these problems and that’s the first step towards fixing them.
“I am the candidate who says we can acknowledge the challenges that we’re facing in our public schools, tackle them head on and address those and make an incredible public school system here in Washington,” Saaris said. “We’re Washington and we can do that work and it’s not just picking one or the other, it is figuring out how to really make an amazing public school system.”
Saaris has raised more money than all his opponents combined, according to filings submitted to the Public Disclosure Commission as of Thursday. Saaris has $329,000 in his campaign coffers, overtaking Reykdal’s $235,000 and Olson’s $65,000. Blair hasn’t raised any money during his campaign.
Of Saaris’ over 750 contributions, 40% are from out-of-state donors, while Reykdal and Olson have around 4% of out-of-state campaign contributors.
Saaris attributes these donors to his decade of experience as the CEO of the nonprofit he founded called Equal Opportunity Schools. Through that work, he’s networked with school leaders, government officials and nonprofits across the nation that rallied to support his campaign, he said.
“My campaign is really grassroots: it’s parents, it’s educators, I talk regularly on the phone with colleagues I’ve worked with all over the country and these are often teachers that I learned to teach together with, or principles or parents, classmates I went to college with,” Saaris said. “They are excited by the idea that we could really make gains on some of these issues that are common across the country.”
A number of his donations stem from other nonprofits and education think tanks, some that support charter school expansion in Washington.
Donations include $2,200 from Donald Nielsen, the chair of the American Center for Transforming Education, an offshoot of Seattle-based nonprofit Discovery Institute that promotes expanding charter schools. Lobbyist for the Washington State Charter Schools Association Elizabeth Bloxham donated $500. Saaris reported a $1,000 donation from Natalie Walrond, project director at San Francisco based WestEd, whose work includes partnering with charter schools to help meet the needs of their students and advocating for expanding school choice policies at the state level.
Although they donated, he said, organizations won’t influence his position supporting the current laws surrounding charter schools. While they may disagree in some areas, they align in their end goal of using evidence-based practices to “do what’s right for kids,” he said.
“That’s I think all of my supporters know that I stand and come from,” Saaris said. “I think folks are excited about that, even if we disagree on some of the particulars about how you might get there and what the right policies may be.”
Elena Perry’s work is funded in part by members of the Spokane community via the Community Journalism and Civic Engagement Fund. This s
