The complicated issues of charter schools, property taxes, school funding, and economic diversity

Last week Georgia State University’s Fiscal Research Center released a new study examining the impact of metro Atlanta charter schools’ priority attendance zones on property values within those zonesIn the spring, I’d provided information about ANCS to Assistant Professor Carlianne Patrick and her research team working on this study, so I was interested to see what came of it.  This excerpt from the FRC’s press release about the study highlights some of the key findings:

Unlike most charter schools in the United States where attendance areas are widely dispersed, 13 Georgia charter schools have priority attendance zones, a feature that gives families a greater chance of admission. Families located in priority one zones are more likely to be selected for admission than families in priority two or priority three zones. Analyzing the impact on neighborhoods closest to the border of the highest-priority attendance zone provides a better snapshot of the true effect on property values.   

  • For elementary school neighborhoods: Homes sold for 9 to 13 percent more than similar homes in priority two zones. 
  • For middle school neighborhoods: Homes sold for 8.5 to 10.5 percent more than similar homes in priority two zones. 
  • For high school neighborhoods: Homes sold for 10 percent more than similar homes in priority two zones. 

While this data points to a high demand for homes in neighborhoods with charter school enrollment priority zones, the report also helps refute notions that charter schools erode public schools. The increased home values means increased tax revenue, which is a benefit for public school districts.

I have had some mixed feelings upon reading the findings from the study.  On one hand, it makes me proud that our school has played a role in many of the positive changes Grant Park and Ormewood Park have seen over the past 15 years.  Certainly many people and factors have made these neighborhoods desirable places for families to live, and it’s clear that the committed group of parents and educators who started our school way back when deserve credit for their role.  It’s also rewarding to know that any rise in home values that can be attributed to our school results in a benefit for schools across Atlanta Public Schools since the largest percentage of school funding for our district derives from the city’s property tax revenues of which all schools receive a proportional share.

Yet the findings from this study also nag at me for a few reasons.  One of them is the flip side of the positive impact from those increased property values in our priority attendance zone.  As home valuations increases, the economic diversity of these neighborhoods decreases.  Individuals and families of lower income levels begin to become priced out of these neighborhoods, a trend that census data suggests has been happening in our area over the past 15 or so years.  At ANCS, we’re trying to achieve a socioeconomically diverse student body because of the significant educational and social benefits it brings to students.  At the same time, we’re committed to serving the neighborhoods right around each campus because doing so contributes to the sense of community that is key to the mission of our school.  Therefore, the changes in the income diversity of these neighborhoods creates a tension between these twin aims.

I also wonder about the heavy reliance on tax revenue–especially property tax revenue–in school funding formulas and the impact this reliance has on our schools and cities.  A policy report titled “The Property Tax-School Funding Dilemma” captures the complicated issues that arise from our country’s long history of linking school funding to local property taxes.  While using local property taxes as the major basis for school funding increases the likelihood that the residents being taxed will be more engaged in decision-making about the use of those funds, the recent recession shows what can happen when that source of revenue shrinks dramatically and the same outcomes for students are expected with one-third less money.  The report argues that using property taxes for determining school funding is generally a good thing but that it requires targeted and frequent policy supports to keep from the damaging effects that can sometimes result when left unchecked.

There are all sorts of nuanced economic and sociological issues wrapped up in these reports about charter school attendance zones, home values, taxes, funding, and diversity–nuances well beyond anything I can easily and neatly sum up in a blog post.  What’s clear, though, is that there need to be structures to support dialogue and common goal setting between communities, school districts, and policymakers at the local and state level to insure that decisions by one group are not adversely impacted by decisions made by another group.  We should all be engaged in whatever ways we can in considering the ins and outs of policy and funding decisions (I might suggest a simple first step of subscribing to the weekly newsletter of the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute).  It’s critical that we stay informed about issues that are important to all of us and our homes, our children, and our city.