Witnesses tell committee Senate Bill 454 needs clearer planning‑year rules, stronger authorizer oversight and board training

Witnesses testifying on Senate Bill 454 told a legislative subcommittee that the bill’s goal of increased accountability for public charter schools is welcome but needs clearer statutory language and implementation guardrails.

Kevin Mason, with the Public Charter School Alliance of South Carolina, told the committee that charter schools are public, tuition‑free and accountable and said the bill makes “meaningful structural changes” in governance standards, transparency and authorizer oversight. Mason provided data intended to frame the need for clarity: “Today we have 111 operating charter schools statewide, serving over 66,000 students,” and said 80% of state‑rated grade bands are at “average or better” under the state accountability system. He said the alliance has suggested language to “strengthen clarity, protect autonomy, and to avoid unintended consequences” as the measure moves through the legislature.

Jay Ragley, representing the Heron Institute’s board of directors, asked the committee to consider two proposals his group submitted in a letter: make the planning year for new charter schools mandatory rather than optional, and tighten rules for Alternative Education Campus (AEC) designations so schools granted that status actually serve the high‑need populations the statute requires. Ragley warned against a scenario in which a struggling school “on, if you will, 2 strikes” might attempt to change designation to avoid accountability and suggested a one‑year cure period but loss of designation if a school fails to meet AEC criteria.

Daniel Prentice, chief financial officer for the Charleston County School District, said Charleston — the district’s board as a local authorizer of nine charter schools — has proposed amendments to better define the relationship and responsibilities between local authorizers and statewide or institute authorizers.

Mike Sinclair, superintendent with the Charter Institute at Erskine, said the bill should retain and strengthen provisions on authorizer accountability and added three priorities for amendment consideration: annual board training for charter governance boards that oversee public funds, clear expectations and onboarding pathways for new authorizers, and increased transparency and guardrails for management companies that run or support multiple schools. “These boards are being tasked with managing millions of taxpayer dollars,” Sinclair said, urging ongoing training and clearer oversight.

Committee staff told members they have received a substantial number of recommended edits from stakeholders and are drafting amendment language. Staff described most likely edits as clarifying or explanatory; no formal amendments were presented and the committee took no vote during the session.

The subcommittee heard questions from members about how virtual charter schools serve students with disabilities, how special education services are delivered online, and who should deliver board training. Witnesses recommended a partnership model in which authorizers contribute practical training content and the State Department provides a central, consistent core to avoid conflicts of interest. The meeting concluded with staff requesting more time to format and circulate proposed amendments and the committee adjourning.

Next steps: staff will circulate drafted amendment language for members’ review before further committee action.