Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Charter School Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Idaho financing tools saved charter schools an estimated $113 million, speaker tells House committee
Summary
A national policy analyst told the Idaho House Education Committee that state-backed short‑ and long‑term financing tools, leveraged with philanthropy, have reduced charter school facility costs and freed funds for instruction, while lawmakers discussed caps and next steps.
Matthew Joseph, senior policy advisor for education funding at ExcelinEd, told the Idaho House Education Committee that a combined set of state policies and private support has substantially lowered facility financing costs for charter schools and allowed those dollars to be reinvested in instruction.
"The state so far has spent $0...the total savings so far to the state is a $113,000,000," Joseph said, summarizing a study his organization produced with Bloom that examined Idaho charter‑school facility financing. He said those savings translate, on average, into the equivalent of about 10 additional teachers per charter school when annualized.
Why it matters: Committee members pressed for details because the financing tools — a no‑interest revolving loan fund for start‑up financing and a separate moral‑obligation credit enhancement for long‑term bonds — affect charter schools’ operating budgets and teacher hiring. Joseph and charter‑school representatives said the policies reduced reliance on costly leases and private developer arrangements.
Key findings Joseph presented include a statewide average facilities expenditure of $1,857 per charter school student; after existing state support, charter schools still shoulder roughly $1,294 per student from operating funds. That share, Joseph said, is about 70% of facilities costs and is a lower state contribution than many other states he studied (he cited Tennessee as an example meeting about 63% of need in his analysis).
Joseph described how the two tools work in sequence: short‑term, no‑interest loans from a revolving loan fund (about $2.5 million per loan, he said) help new schools reach a track record; after three to five years, schools can access long‑term bond financing supported by the state's moral‑obligation pledge, lowering long‑term interest rates. He credited private partners — notably Building Hope and philanthropic matching (Joseph named the Albertson Foundation) — with multiplying the program's impact by matching state funds and smoothing the transition from short‑ to long‑term financing.
Joseph cited examples discussed in the study: Idaho Novus Classical Academy used the revolving loan and philanthropic match to reduce bank financing needs and cut annual financing costs by nearly $1 million in his comparison; Sage International and Elevate Academy accessed state credit enhancement or refinancing to secure lower long‑term rates. He said participating programs have repaid loans with no defaults to date.
Blake (on behalf of the Idaho Charter School Network) told the committee that legislative changes in the prior session altered facility funding. He said the legislature set a flat facility allocation of $400 per student but eliminated lottery funding that previously added about $100 per student; restoring that $100 would carry a fiscal note of roughly $3 million and, he said, would apply only to charter schools.
Members asked for follow‑up details. Representative Nelson requested the statutory criteria that the Idaho program uses to vet loans and credit support; Joseph said the criteria are written into statute and offered to provide greater detail to the committee. Representative Harris and others questioned whether the moral‑obligation cap should be raised; Joseph said the moral‑obligation authority has been reached and increasing it is how other states have met rising demand.
Committee business: The committee approved the minutes for Jan. 7, 2025, by motion (Representative Church moved to approve; the chair called the voice vote and the motion carried). No roll‑call tally was recorded in the transcript.
What was not decided: No bill votes or new legislation were adopted during the discussion. Committee members signaled interest in follow‑up information on statutory criteria, fiscal implications of raising the moral‑obligation cap, and the $3 million fiscal note to restore the lottery portion of facility funding for charter schools.
The committee was told an RS (revised statute or request sheet) would be posted for the next day’s agenda; presenters and committee staff said they would provide supplemental documents and criteria to members after the hearing.
