Romney vetoes freeze on new charter schools

Governor Mitt Romney, as promised, vetoed a freeze yesterday on the opening of new charter schools, leaving lawmakers to decide whether to override his action or accept his suggested overhaul of charter school funding.

Several members of the House Education Committee said yesterday that they were seriously studying the governor's proposed changes, but could not predict whether enough representatives wanted to override the veto so they would have more time to consider his proposal.

"What they're concerned about is the [funding] formula," said Representative Marie P. St. Fleur, Democrat of Dorchester and chairwoman of the House Education Committee. "The majority of the House is not anticharter. They want equity in the funding."

Romney said yesterday that the moratorium was inconsistent with the Legislature's budget, which included $37 million to reimburse local districts for the money they now send to educate charter school students. The allotment reimburses school systems for the first three years after each student transfers to a charter school. The state had promised in the past that they would be reimbursed, but that has not occurred consistently. The money was cut in the 2004 budget.

Many legislators said that the governor's proposed changes were a good first step, but the lawmakers were divided about the practicality of pushing through changes with one month remaining in the legislative session.

The House originally voted for the moratorium by voice vote, and it would be the first chamber to vote on an override.

The Senate voted 26 to 13 last month to prevent new charter schools from being created or opened through July 2005, until the state overhauls the funding of charter schools.

Romney's proposal, first drafted by Worcester school officials, seeks to address local complaints that charter schools, which operate free of district control, siphon too much money from school system budgets. His plan would save local school districts an estimated $10.5 million in a year by changing the way charter school costs are calculated. The most expensive public school students, including those who need intensive English classes or special education, no longer would be included in the funding formula.

Representative Alice K. Wolf, Democrat of Cambridge, said she wanted to override the governor's veto. "Look. We have maybe a once in 10-year opportunity to fix the financing for charter schools, and we should take a little time to do that," she said.

Other House members said they wanted to work with Romney on his idea.

"The governor has weighed in with a serious proposal, and since there is a potential meeting of the minds right now, we're going to attempt to . . . seize the moment," said Representative Brian Golden, Democrat of Allston.

The Massachusetts Association of School Committees urged legislators to keep the moratorium and overhaul the charter school law. Among other objections, the group opposes allowing out-of-state companies to start charter schools.

"We need to get back to where it was an incubator program," where new educational methods were tried, said Paul Schlichtman, the association's president.

Boyce Slayman, a consultant to the five charter schools that would be shut down in the Legislature's budget, said the schools feel that they're hostages. But the governor's plan does not address each local community's concerns, he said.

"What's on the table is not enough," he said. "The school districts feel they are giving up too much money. There's nothing in there to address [the issues of] rural communities."

Representative Stephen P. LeDuc, Republican of Marlborough, said Romney's proposal would not necessarily save all districts money, but would throw $9 million in federal money for charter school buildings into the mix.

"What the governor has done is neutralize a lot of people in favor of a moratorium," he said. "I personally believe we still need a moratorium."

Suzanne Sataline can be reached at sataline@globe.com.