Although they are “public schools” on paper, in reality charter schools are private businesses that siphon billions of dollars a year from traditional public schools. These traditional public schools educate about 88% of the nation’s youth and are typically under-funded and vilified by the rich and their political and media representatives.
Over the last 30+ years, numerous court cases, thousands of news articles, and hundreds of scholarly papers and books have shown that charter schools also regularly oppose public accountability and transparency. Not surprisingly, the charter school sector is constantly plagued by financial waste, fraud, and abuse of all kinds.
This persistent lack of public accountability and transparency is currently at the center of another high-profile court case, this time in New Jersey.
In a May 24, 2026, article in The Jersey Vindicator, “N.J. appeals court to decide whether state comptroller can force charter school to hand over financial records,” we learn that, “A New Jersey appeals court will hear a case on May 28 that will determine whether private charter school management organizations can be compelled to disclose financial records tied to publicly funded schools.”
The decision will have implications for a range of private entities that contract with governments and public agencies at all levels.
At the center of this particular court case is “College Achieve Public Schools Inc., a controversial Tinton Falls-based nonprofit [founded in 2012] that manages three New Jersey charter school networks across 11 campuses, including College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School.”
Two years ago, “the [State] comptroller’s office subpoenaed the school and later the management company for financial records and other documents, then filed a complaint when all the records were not produced.” Both the school and the private company that manages the school “then filed their own lawsuits against the Office of the State Comptroller seeking to block access to the records and the findings of an internal misconduct investigation.”
In 2025, “A Superior Court judge rejected the management company’s effort to quash the subpoena… and ordered College Achieve to produce documents and data related to the charter school. Instead of complying, College Achieve appealed. Three consolidated cases are now pending before the Appellate Division.”
This legal wrangling started because of the same pattern of corruption and fraud seen in so many charter schools across the country. The Jersey Vindicator explains that, “The legal fight stems from an Office of the State Comptroller investigation that uncovered what was described as a pattern of illegal procurement, cash mishandling, nepotism, and a management structure that stripped the publicly funded charter school board of meaningful oversight.” These crimes and wrongdoings are just the tip of the iceberg. Many other illegal and unethical activities took place at College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School.
But why are the private interests behind College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School so opposed to any form of public accountability, especially when they receive tens of millions of public dollars? The private company that manages the charter school, “collected $57 million in public funds across its network between 2016 and 2023, according to the comptroller’s office.”
Put simply, College Achieve, a Charter Management Organization (CMO), is snubbing public accountability on the grounds “that the comptroller had no legal authority to demand the records and that the materials sought were privileged.” In other words, the comptroller’s office “exceeded its authority by demanding access to a private nonprofit’s internal records.”
The Jersey Vindicator clarifies that, “College Achieve has further argued that it is not itself a public entity, even though it manages publicly funded schools, and that the comptroller’s office is improperly attempting to expand its oversight powers into the internal operations of a private nonprofit organization.” Lawyers for the CMO have even argued that “once taxpayer money is paid to a private vendor, how that [public] money is spent falls outside the comptroller’s authority.”
However, “The comptroller’s office has argued that charter schools are public institutions funded by taxpayers and that therefore companies managing those schools cannot avoid accountability simply by organizing themselves as private nonprofits. The office has pointed out that accepting the management company’s legal position could place large amounts of taxpayer-funded charter school spending beyond meaningful public oversight.”
It is important to remember that there is nothing truly public about charter schools or the private entities they have relations with. There never has been. Both are private entities, not public agencies. Simply receiving public funds or being called “public” does not make an entity public. Charter schools and CMOs may contract with the government, but they are not part of the government. Public schools, on the other hand, are political subdivisions of the state with taxing authority. They are governed by publicly elected officials accountable to the public.
Because of endless confusion over the “publicness”/”privateness” of charter schools, the State is treating the College Achieve Greater Asbury Park Charter School as a public entity, which it is not. Further revealing its privatized character, the charter school is even correctly referred to as a “franchise” in court documents.
There is no justification for funneling public funds to private interests. The social wealth produced by working people belongs in public hands and must be used only for public purposes. Private entities and interests must find their own way to secure funds and raise revenue, just like traditional private and religious schools. States should recognize charter schools and CMOs as the private entities that they are and avoid conceptual and legal incoherence.
In this context, it should be remembered that the public system and institutions that came into being with the rise of liberal democracy have been largely seized by major owners of capital. They are no longer actually public and pro-social. They have become retrogressive and neoliberal, focused mainly on attacking the public and expanding pay-the-rich schemes. The key question is how to vest sovereignty in the people so that a public authority worthy of the name arises and directs all the affairs of society free of the influence of the rich.