Across the country, school boards, teacher unions and activists are fueling a culture of resistance to charter schools and school-choice alternatives for parents, particularly minorities. The San Francisco School Board’s campaign against a local charter school, using racial pretexts, is one of the most outrageous examples.

Edison Elementary School was one of the worst schools in the San Francisco District. “Just coming to school was dangerous,” said principal Ken Romines. In 1998, the board granted New York-based Edison Schools Inc. a charter. The renamed Edison Charter Academy reversed a record of failure.

As a “reward,” the board launched an investigation involving now-debunked charges of “counseling out” black and low-income students in an effort to force Edison to renegotiate its charter agreement. In a 4-to-2 vote, the board approved a settlement in June with Edison and “suspended” revocation proceedings against the company pending approval of a state charter.

If the state Board of Education approves the charter, the local school board has agreed to leave Edison Charter Academy alone. As a part of the deal, Edison is also forced to accept a moratorium on additional charters in San Francisco through the district and on growth of the existing school.

Last year, black and Latino students at Edison, comprising 80 percent of the student body, posted average gains on the state’s Academic Performance Index higher than all other schools in the state with significant black and Latino populations. As a whole, Edison posted gains higher than all but two of the district’s 73 elementary schools.

Board member Mark Sanchez argued that it cannot be “the same black kids” taking the test.

The parents formed a coalition “Parents to Save Edison Charter,” showed up en masse at board meetings and even launched an English-Spanish Web site, www.edisonaction.org. “Our children are achieving and we are satisfied… that’s most important,” said Heather Mobley, parent of two Edison students.

The board’s action sends a message that educational innovations are not welcome, and establishes a virtual “how-to” for expelling a charter school. Look for school boards around the country to borrow this page from the San Francisco playbook.

Ironically, the usual suspects that have for years decried the plight of underachieving minorities now find themselves at odds with those same groups. Educrats are threatened by charter school successes because they expose the legacy of low expectations and failure of the education monopoly. Now they are seeking ways to stop the national charter school movement, now in 37 states, including Georgia and the District of Columbia.

Refusing to duplicate successful practices is the response in Virginia. In Arlington, Va., the “Arlington Traditional School” uses Core Knowledge, Open Court and Saxon Math to instruct their students. The school has a waiting list of hundreds, but instead of expanding the concept, the district insists that parents fester in the inequity of its archaic methods and “wait their turn.”

With the exception of Indianapolis, local school boards that opposed the new charter school law chose to move at a snail’s pace in drafting the charter application process for their districts.

A charter school in inner-city Baton Rouge, La., is accused by some of taking a step backward in racial progress. Jim Geiser runs a small charter school in Baton Rouge and wants to open a bigger school serving mostly black children. Offering smaller classes, longer school days and well-equipped classrooms, Geiser’s school has increased test scores by 20 percent.

Geiser’s plans to open another such school was blocked by the Clinton Justice Department, claiming because almost all the students who benefited would be black, it would violate a 45-year-old desegregation order.

Anti-charter forces encouraged by San Francisco should hold off the celebration because they have a fight on their hands. Low-income, inner-city populations are driving a school-choice revolution.

Nationwide, parents have seen improved achievement for their children and will not sit quietly while union-backed school boards turn back the clock to the days of low expectations and failure.

Diallo Dphrepaulezz is a policy fellow at the Center for School Reform at the Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached via email at diallod@pacificresearch.org.