The Times has an article in this morning's paper about what we might expect about what charters come in first.
They get it right in the opening paragraphs (with some irony):
The first charter schools in Washington probably won't be run by the
nation's best-known charter groups with years of experience and strong
During the successful campaign for Initiative 1240, which will allow
as many as 40 charters to open here over five years, supporters talked
about wanting Washington students to have a chance to attend the kind of
schools operated by the nation's top charter operators.
But the highest profile chains are in such demand that most won't be
looking to expand here anytime soon — if at all.
Some national charter-school experts say the wait-and-see stance of many
big charter groups is not surprising.
Of course not. No high-profile charter group will want to come into an uncertain situation. It costs them time and money and those are items no group wants to waste. The one exception seems to be Green Dot out of California.
So, despite the campaign claims, I wouldn't expect to see these great groups here for years. And so it becomes the grassroots charters coming in first. This has an upside and a downside.
Upside? That the creators would be people who genuinely know our state and probably the communities they want to be in.
Downside? With no experience and probably little money, they will be easily co-opted by people waving "expertise" and money in their faces.
The law's limit of 40 charters may also be an issue.
Rocketship, for example, wants to have at least eight schools in any
area where it operates. Given the cap, Haines said that might be more
than Washington would want from any one group.
And hey, big excitement - one of the billionaires who sponsored 1240 finally speaks.
Through a spokeswoman, Paul Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft and the
third-largest donor to the campaign, said he's just pleased that
students in Washington will soon have more choices.