Statement from Senator Martin:

I am in receipt of letter from the Lancaster County Superintendents and union presidents and it
is important to point out many factual errors. Though the letter discusses the funding of public
schools and Senate Bill 1, it is important to understand that Basic Education funding is not
specifically determined by the Senate Education Committee. The Education Committee does
not vote on the Education budget, but instead education funding is added to a bill that is
positioned further in the calendar and after the Senate Education Committee has completed
work on the legislation. The amount of money that is allocated for the Basic Education Funding
formula is negotiated between the General Assembly and the Governor and is appropriated
through the budget process.

Equating increases with EITC allowances to that of basic education funding increases is not
appropriate as schools and foundations, many of which assist children who attend public
schools, that utilize those funds must recruit and locate businesses who are willing to
participate in the program. EITC/OSTC does not impact state appropriations to public
education. It is my belief that EITC/OSTC are important for meeting the critical needs of
students at both public schools and nonpublic schools.

In addition, I have repeatedly stated both in conversations with stakeholders and some of the
signatories of the letter as well as multiple times during the June 7, 2021, Education Committee
meeting, that the initial draft of Senate Bill 1 was the beginning of a process and negotiation.
Further in those same instances, I have also stated plainly that I was interested in having
ongoing conversations precisely around the ideas of cyber charter funding and reforms around
our basic education funding formula, as part of the overall budget negotiation process.

Below are some statements made in the letter followed by a response.

“Boards of Trustees filing statements of financial interests with local school boards
and the department.”

Senate Bill 1 PN0839 clearly states that “A member of the board of trustees of a charter school
entity shall be considered a public official subject to the provisions of 65 Pa.C.S. Ch. 11 (relating
to ethics standards and financial disclosures)” (see page 18 lines 26-29).

Title 65, Chapter 11 known as the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act requires a statement
of financial interest be filed with the State Ethics Commission. This document is of course public
and can be accessed by any member of the public, including a school board.

“Conflict of interest protections related to charter administrators and boards of trustees

for the awarding of contracts.”
In House Bill 97 PN2187, the conflict of interest language you are referring to is on page 21 lines
5-8 and page 22 lines 6-10, with both subsections citing 65 Pa.C.S § 1102.

In Senate Bill 1 PN0839, charter administrators and members of the Boards of Trustees are
considered public officials subject to the provisions of the entirety of 65 Pa.C.S. Ch. 11, which
includes 65 Pa.C.S § 1102, conflicts of interest, prohibitions on voting and entering into contracts
(see page 18 lines 26-29 and page 20 lines 1-5).

Further, current School Code law § 324(c) states, “(c) It shall not be a violation of this section
for a school district to contract for the purchase of goods or services from a business with which
a school director is associated to the extent permitted by and in compliance with 65 Pa.C.S. Ch.
11 (relating to ethics standards and financial disclosure).

“An organizational chart describing the school governance structure, including the
lines of authority and reporting between a board of trustees, administrators, staff and
any educational management service provider that will provide management services
to charter school entities.”

Current law, § 1719-A(a)(4) of the School Code requires a charter applicant to include
information on the proposed governance structure of the charter school.

“Evidence on education management service provider’s record and history of serving

certain student populations and any draft contract with an education management
service provider.”

I would consider supporting this if the Superintendents and union Presidents who signed the
letter also agree to make draft contracts during the collective bargaining negotiations process
available for public inspection and for the media.

“Authority for a charter authorizer (namely a school board) to have access to all
charter records, including financial reports, financial audits, teacher certification and
personnel records and aggregate standardized test scores.”

In addition to requirements for the school district to assess and conduct a comprehensive
review of a charter school, current law, § 1728-A(a) of the School Code states “[t]he local board
of school directors shall have ongoing access to the records and facilities of the charter school to
ensure that the charter school is in compliance with its charter and this act and that
requirements for testing, civil rights and student health and safety are being met.” [emphasis
added]

Current law, § 1719-A(9) of the School Code requires a charter application to include “[t]he
financial plan for the charter school and the provisions which will be made for auditing the
school…” and § 1729-A(a)(3) states that, “[f]ailure to meet generally accepted standards of
fiscal management or audit requirements” are grounds for a school board to not renew or
revoke a charter.

Senate Bill 1 PN0839 states “a charter school entity may be subject to an annual audit by the
Auditor General…” and these audits are public documents (see page 16 line 30 – page 17 line
1).

Finally, aggregate standardized test scores are already publicly available.