Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy Charter Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances charter accountability bill; stakeholders oppose moratorium idea
Summary
Senator Erin Susinski brought Senate File 1311 before the Education Policy Committee on March 12, proposing new transparency and oversight requirements for charter schools and authorizers.
Get email alerts on the Education Policy Charter Schools topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senator Erin Susinski brought Senate File 1311 before the Senate Education Policy Committee on March 12, 2025, proposing additional transparency and accountability requirements for Minnesota charter public schools and their authorizers.
The bill, as amended in committee, requires annual training for authorizers tied to Department of Education performance reviews, mandates charter boards establish finance committees (and involve authorizers on financial corrective actions), and requires authorizers to post charter contracts, performance reviews and notices of intervention or corrective action on their websites for five years. It also tightens conflict‑of‑interest rules for building/affiliate boards and requires livestreaming of closure hearings.
Joey Cienian, executive director of the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools, told senators the sector supports strong accountability and has worked with the legislature on prior reforms. He said a moratorium on charter openings would not address quality problems and would deny families access to desired schools.
"We emphatically agree that all charter public schools need to be accountable, transparent, and held to high standards," Cienian said.
Authorizers that testified supported the measure. Beth Topolock, executive director of Friends of Education, which authorizes 11 charter schools, said the organization has closed schools that failed to meet contract outcomes and that accountability is central to the charter model. "We do not apologize for holding schools accountable," Topolock said. Neo, another authorizer, emphasized existing authorizer evaluation processes and implementation of recent laws.
Charter school leaders described the sector's role serving students who have not been well served by large districts. Jason Olberich of Eagle Ridge Academy and Brett Wedland of NOVA Classical Academy described long wait lists and expansion plans; they said a moratorium on new or expanded charter schools would prevent needed facilities improvements and deny students access to high‑quality programs. Kate Hinton of Math & Science Academy described a large wait list and high academic performance at her school.
Multiple speakers supported the bill's provisions but opposed a separate moratorium on new charter openings or expansions, a topic raised in public discussion but not part of SF 1311. Several senators suggested clarifying conflict‑of‑interest language and ensuring the bill's new requirements are proportional and workable for smaller schools and authorizers. Senator Erin Duckworth recommended making financial oversight meetings monthly rather than quarterly for schools in financial distress and suggested emphasizing disclosure requirements over blanket prohibitions in conflict rules.
The committee adopted an A2 amendment and laid SF 1311 over for possible inclusion in the omnibus bill. Witnesses and committee members described ongoing work across authorizers, MDE and the charter sector to improve oversight and to avoid a one‑size‑fits‑all moratorium that would restrict family options.
Votes at a glance
- A2 amendment to SF 1311 — moved by Senator Erin Susinski; adopted by voice vote. (No roll‑call tally recorded in the transcript.) - Senate File 1311, as amended — laid over for possible inclusion in omnibus legislation (voice action; no roll‑call tally recorded).
Why it matters
SF 1311 would increase public access to authorizer contracts, performance reviews and notices of corrective action, strengthen authorizer training, and add financial governance requirements at charter boards. Proponents argued the measures address transparency gaps while opponents of a moratorium argued that blocking new or expanded charter sites would harm families seeking alternatives to traditional districts.
What's next
The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in the omnibus package; sponsors and stakeholders indicated continued work with MDE, authorizers and charter organizations to refine language and implementation details.

