Indianapolis Weighs a ‘Grand Bargain’ to Share Buses and Buildings — at the Cost of Charter Autonomy

Indianapolis' state-ordered panel is racing to issue recommendations by Dec. 17 on whether and how charter schools and Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) could share district buildings and transportation — possibly in exchange for reduced autonomy for charter operators.

The debate comes as charter enrollment has surged: charters now educate more than half of Indianapolis students, shifting influence away from the elected school board and intensifying disagreements over control of facilities, transportation and local tax dollars.

Two Models, One Big Tradeoff

The panel has narrowed its options to two principal governance models, both of which would move decision-making power from the elected IPS board to appointed authorities. One proposal would create a collaborative compact advisory board composed of appointees from the district, the mayor and charter operators. The other would establish an Indianapolis Education Authority led by a mayor-appointed board and a new city secretary of education.

Both approaches aim to coordinate access to underused school buildings and to expand busing for charter students. But they also raise concerns about accountability: residents at recent meetings booed the panel's decision to focus on appointed boards instead of preserving authority for an elected school board.

Who Would Participate — And Who Decides?

A central point of contention is whether participation in any collective plan should be mandatory for all Indianapolis charter schools. Some proposals would require universal participation to make a unified system feasible; others would leave joining voluntary. IPS Superintendent Aleesia Johnson and panel member Angela Smith-Jones have argued that optional participation would undermine the system’s effectiveness and equity. Several charter leaders, including Scott Bess and Paramount CEO Tommy Reddicks, say schools should retain the right to choose.

Scott Bess, founder of Purdue Polytechnic charter high schools, described the potential tradeoff this way: by accessing shared resources, charter schools may have to accept more standardization in schedules, calendars and accountability — a trade he and others call a 'grand bargain.'

Practical Stakes: Buses, Buildings and Dollars

Practically, a collective busing plan would likely require charters to align daily start and end times and vacation calendars so buses can carry multiple groups on each route. Charters that own or lease buildings might be asked to transfer those assets or leases to the new authority, which could reassign, renovate or even close campuses based on systemwide needs.

The financial incentive to join is significant. Earlier this year the state legislature passed Senate Bill 1, which shifts a share of local property-tax dollars to charter schools beginning in 2028: $2,050 per student in 2028, rising to $3,750 per student by 2031. Several lawmakers and panel members have signaled an expectation that those funds could be routed through any new authority rather than sent directly to individual schools on top of authority funding.

Indiana House Education Committee Chair Robert Behning has been explicit: access to the property-tax transfers may hinge on participation in the authority. At the same time, he and other legislators have resisted proposals that would centralize charter authorizing power solely in the mayor’s office, warning that authorizing rules must be durable across election cycles.

What Comes Next

The Indianapolis Local Education Alliance will finalize its recommendations on Dec. 17. Any proposal that emerges will likely require approval from the Republican-controlled state legislature, which has favored school choice policies in recent years. Meanwhile, charter leaders are weighing the costs and benefits: some say modest schedule changes are a fair trade for expanded transportation and shared facilities, while others insist that giving up operational independence would undermine the purpose of charter schools.

As the panel finalizes its advice, the city faces a clear choice: build an appointed authority that can quickly coordinate resources across charters and the district, or preserve local electoral control and risk leaving many students without improved transportation or access to idle school space. The resolution will reshape Indianapolis' education landscape and could become a model for how other cities reconcile rapid charter growth with district governance.