I’m not a betting man. The extent of my gambling history boils down to a few scratch offs from the local supermarket that failed to pan out.

And while I once correctly predicted the outcome and exact final score of a Major League Soccer Championship in my brief yet halcyon days as a sportswriter just out of college, I don’t consider myself all that good at predictions either.

So I’m bucking two personal characteristics in considering House Bill 1423 a done deal, a culmination of a tumultuous and heated year. It has yet to pass the full senate but it made it through the Senate Education Committee and the Appropriations Committee. Compared to property tax reform legislation last year, HB 1423 has experienced comparatively smooth sailing (legislatively; not in the realm of public opinion). That’s been aided by the Indianapolis Local Educcation Authority sending their recommendations to the legislature with an 8-1 vote after a year of public meetings. I think that emboldened the legislature to push those recommendations ahead with very few adjustments.

HB 1423 is a big deal, educationally speaking. It would establish the Indianapolis Public Education Corporation (IPEC). The IPEC, as I’ve written about before, would be handed responsibility for the management of school buildings, transportation, and an accountability system for all Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) district schools and charter schools in Indianapolis. It would also handle the distribution of property tax dollars. Its creation will mark a monumental shift in the relationship between IPS and charter schools.

Once the bill passes, things are slated to move quickly. For example, the nine members of the IPEC are supposed to be appointed by the end of March. In legislative terms, that’s the equivalent of the blink of an eye. So it’s worth taking a step back to consider what comes next after HB 1423 becomes law.

Just How Unprecedented Are These Future Waters?

Pretty darn unprecedented. To my knowledge (informed by a variety of different Google searches), the shift underway in Indianapolis where a new body is created to oversee transportation, facilities, and accountability for all public schools in an area (both traditional and charter) has not happened anywhere else in the country.

This is a major evolution to how public schooling is delivered in one of the country’s biggest cities. Which is not the same as saying this is some grand experiment in disruption or chaos with students as mere guinea pigs.

Indiana has pushed the envelope on education before. With the creation of Innovation Network Schools, for example. It’s pushing the envelope again. And for good reasons.

IPS is on the brink of financial insolvency without a major operating referendum. Enrollment in IPS continues to shrink year over year (with Rebuilding Stronger only seeming to accelerate enrollment declines rather than slow them).

Meanwhile, enrollment at charter schools was stagnant this last year (though they continue to enroll more students and more students of color than traditional IPS schools). And for as much as charter schools suffer from bad-faith attacks, too many of them aren’t living up to their promise of better results for kids in exchange for greater autonomy (though charter school students still, on the whole, tend to outperform their peers in direct-run IPS schools).

It’s high time Indianapolis as a whole did better for students without demanding the burden for getting better just fall at the feet of front-line educators or pretending a sudden influx of state funding would instantly produce better results. HB 1423 is a possible step in that direction.

Who Will Serve on the IPEC?

Once appointed, the nine-member body of the IPEC will be instantly vaulted to the forefront of the public education conversation in Indianapolis. Who is an ideal candidate?

I hope to see balanced, neutral folks who understand our education landscape intimately. I’m sure anyone will bring some amount of bias toward traditional public schools or charter schools to the role. That’s fine so long as they’re honest about it. Ultimately, I think we need people who recognize the landscape is no longer traditional. Our education system isn’t dominated by a single public school district anymore. We must contend with that reality, not deny it or seek to roll back the clock to a time that isn’t coming back.

Rather than preference one school type over another, the IPEC is in a position to bring increased quality to all school types. Indianapolis has been locked in a war between traditional public school advocates and charter school advocates for the past twelve months or more. We need IPEC members to rise above the battlefield and move us forward productively as a community that cares deeply about the education Indianapolis students receive.

A Flaw in the Facilities Portion of the Plan?

HB 1423 will allow charter schools to opt out of the facilities authority created under the legislation. That means they can retain ownership of their building. In exchange, they give up access to tax dollars earmarked for capital expenses. On February 11, the Senate Education Committee advanced Amendment 28, which clarified that IPS can also opt out of the facilities plan with the same trade off as charter schools.

Is this opt out a fatal flaw? At least within the facilities portion of the plan? After all, a unified facilities authority isn’t much use if the majority of public school buildings it could oversee opt out. Wouldn’t that just create further fragmentation within a system that we’re aiming to bring more unity to?

I’m not terribly worried here. The “stick” involved just hurts too much. Schools want access to tax dollars for capital projects. I do think this means that initially some schools will opt out given their unique situations. But long term I expect practically every IPS and charter school to opt in to the facilities authority.

Does the IPEC Just Add Unnecessary Bureaucracy?

First, I disagree with those who claim the IPEC will diminish democracy or somehow neuter the power of IPS’ elected school board. Certainly, it will change the dynamics of the IPS board, though they’ll retain the powers I’d argue matter most for an elected school board (budgeting, curriculum, hiring, etc.).

But! The argument I am sympathetic to is the “added bureaucracy” one, which boils down to: How does a new body on top of the existing bodies help produce a better system? More is not always more when it comes to government functions.

I hear that. In fact, I think it’s the biggest danger here. This legislation very well could add unnecessary friction and clunkiness to our education system. Bureaucracy for bureaucracy’s sake with little benefit to students.

But! It could also bring greater transparency, efficiency, accountability, and systematization to decisions that effect IPS and charter schools and create stronger conditions for both school types to succeed. I’m banking on the latter, even as I leave room for the possibility of the former.

I expect the trajectory we’re on to begin emerging when the initial appointees are selected in March. By the time the bill passes later this month, we won’t have long to wait.