These are the people who will be vying to take over my school. See my comment below.
The charter school PR machine does a tremendous job of painting a pretty picture about purported academic success at its schools. You repeat it verbatim, with not a single critical question asked, or alternate point of view presented.
You do the public a disservice.
Public, please google "Stanford charter school study" and you will quickly find that only 17% of charters outscore public schools. 17%. If you choose to highlight successful charters (to which you must apply, impose a parent participation requirement, and in some cases legally hold back students a grade, none of which public schools are allowed to do) then you present the public with a misleading view that all charter schools are better than all public schools. Attrition at the "best" charters is high. Where do the students who don't want to be flunked a grade go? Right back to public schools who then get negative PR for being "Titanics".
Charter school CEO's sometimes pay themselves outrageous sums of money because they can, unlike public school workers. Most times they oversee far few less students. Google "Geoffrey Canada salary"
With no requirement to give parents a democratic voice in their schools, charters sometimes conduct financial malfeasance (google "Ivy Academia charter) or financial mismanagement (google "ICEF schools insolvent") with little to no transparency.
Sometimes, the schools are so poorly run, they close mid year or at the end of the year (google "green dot animo justice high school) leaving students and parents in the lurch.
There is no magic bullet to improving education. It takes hard work by parents, students, and teachers, and an interest by all members of society who should support success for all students, not just for a lucky few.