The Education Power Play: Indianapolis’ New School Board and the Battle for Control
There’s something deeply unsettling about the way power shifts in education—especially when it happens under the guise of reform. Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett’s recent appointment of a new board to oversee the city’s public education system has sparked a debate that goes far beyond the names on the list. This isn’t just about who’s in charge; it’s about who gets to decide the future of public education in a city already grappling with inequality and division.
A Board Born of Controversy
Let’s start with the basics: the Indianapolis Public Education Corporation (IPEC) is no ordinary board. Created by House Enrolled Act 1423, it’s a state-mandated entity designed to take over key responsibilities from the elected Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) board. We’re talking about levying taxes, managing facilities, and even approving revenue-sharing formulas between traditional public schools and charter schools. On paper, it sounds like a plan to streamline operations and ensure fairness. But here’s where it gets tricky: the IPEC board is appointed, not elected.
Personally, I think this is where the real tension lies. Elected school boards are accountable to the voters who put them there. Appointed boards? Not so much. What many people don’t realize is that this shift effectively removes a layer of democratic oversight. Sure, the IPS board still handles academic programming, but by 2028-29, IPEC will control the purse strings and the buildings. If you take a step back and think about it, this is a significant transfer of power from the community to a group of appointees—some of whom have ties to charter schools.
The Charter School Question
Speaking of charter schools, let’s talk about representation. Four out of the nine IPEC board members are charter school leaders. Now, I’m not inherently opposed to charter schools—they can offer innovative approaches and choices for families. But when nearly half of a board tasked with equitable funding has a vested interest in charters, it raises questions. What this really suggests is that the balance of power is tilting in favor of a system that has long been criticized for siphoning resources from traditional public schools.
One thing that immediately stands out is the appointment of David Harris, CEO of Christel House International, as board chair. Harris co-founded the Mind Trust, an organization that has been a driving force behind charter school expansion in Indianapolis. From my perspective, this isn’t just a coincidence. It’s a strategic move to ensure that charter schools have a seat—or rather, several seats—at the table.
The Democratic Deficit
Advocates of traditional public schools are sounding the alarm, and it’s not hard to see why. The IPS Board of School Commissioners is elected by the community, making it directly accountable to the people it serves. The IPEC board, on the other hand, is appointed by the mayor. This might seem like a minor detail, but it’s a fundamental difference. Appointed officials are more susceptible to influence from special interest groups, whether it’s charter school networks or corporate donors.
What makes this particularly fascinating is how it reflects a broader trend in education policy: the erosion of local control. Across the country, we’re seeing state legislatures and unelected boards take over responsibilities traditionally held by local communities. This raises a deeper question: Who should have the final say in how our children are educated?
Looking Ahead: What’s at Stake?
By July 1, 2026, IPEC will have the power to impose property tax levies to pay for school-related debts. This is a big deal. Taxes are the lifeblood of public education, and who controls them wields immense influence. If the revenue-sharing formula favors charter schools, traditional public schools could be left scrambling for resources.
In my opinion, the real danger here isn’t just about funding. It’s about the precedent being set. If we allow unelected boards to make decisions that directly impact our communities, we’re surrendering a fundamental aspect of democracy. Education isn’t just about test scores and budgets—it’s about shaping the future of our society.
Final Thoughts
As I reflect on the IPEC board and its implications, I’m reminded of a quote from the late educator John Dewey: ‘Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.’ What’s happening in Indianapolis isn’t just a bureaucratic reshuffling—it’s a battle for the soul of public education.
Personally, I think the most important question we should be asking is: Who benefits from this change? Is it the students, the teachers, the community? Or is it the charter school networks and the politicians who back them? The answers aren’t always clear, but one thing is certain: the stakes have never been higher.
If you’re in Indianapolis, pay attention. This isn’t just about schools—it’s about power, equity, and the kind of future we want to build. And if you’re elsewhere, take note. What’s happening here could very well be coming to your city next.
