Did you know search engines like Google are changing the way you see news? Keep Chalkbeat’s valuable education coverage at the top of your feeds by clicking here and checking the box next to our name.
Voters will elect members of the new Indianapolis Public Schools board on Nov. 3. But this isn’t the kind of school board election the city has seen before.
Fifteen candidates are running for five seats on a board that is losing authority over taxes, referendums, debt, transportation, and facilities to the Indianapolis Public Education Corporation. State lawmakers created IPEC to establish more-unified control over IPS and charter schools in the district’s boundaries.
How new board members navigate this chapter for one of the state’s largest school districts could determine whether IPEC’s authority grows over time. They will also help determine the district’s response to a long-term decline in enrollment, ongoing financial pressures, and its relationship with the charter school sector that has become increasingly combative.
In the last few years, the relationship between IPS and state policymakers has also been defined by conflict. It resisted a push from Republican lawmakers to uproot the district’s funding system in favor of property tax sharing with charter schools.
The district lost that fight in 2025, when the state required IPS to split that money, beginning in 2028. That came on the heels of a 2023 law requiring the district to share money from voter-approved ballot measures with charters.
Lawmakers then created IPEC earlier this year over objections from district leaders, and gave Mayor Joe Hogsett the power to appoint the corporation’s nine members.
The first big test for both the corporation and the district will be a crucial $95 million referendum for city public schools that’s also on the November ballot.
IPS will receive about half of the referendum revenue if it passes, although the district expects to make $20 million in cuts even if voters approve the referendum. Charter schools will get the rest.
But recent decisions by the district governing how families enroll in schools and the IPS Innovation Network could test the working relationship between IPS and IPEC. Newly elected IPS board members will be expected to collaborate with IPEC on reshaping the district, which could include closing schools. But the power imbalance could breed animosity and tension on the new IPS board, experts say.
Terry Spradlin, executive director of the Indiana School Boards Association, said the IPS board is in a difficult position of trying to run the day-to-day operations and manage limited resources.
“It’s an odd model, and it’s almost inherent that it’s begging for conflict because of those competing interests and goals,” Spradlin said. “I don’t know if it’s a model set up for success.”
Among the candidates, there are two emerging schools of thought when it comes to IPEC.
Hope Duke Star is both president of the IPS board and the district’s representative on IPEC. She’s seeking reelection for the board’s District 3 seat, and in the past has been backed by groups that fundraise for charters.
This election cycle, Duke Star sought no endorsements, and reported raising no money. Most candidates reported some type of non-cash support of goods or services, or in-kind donations, from nonprofits Stand for Children or RISE Indy.
Duke Star stressed that while some people are focused on a supposed “beef” between IPS and charter schools that could complicate IPEC’s work, she wants officials to collaborate and prevent recent changes from hurting families.
“If we’re going to destabilize families in the middle of a community, we need to create a safety net,” Duke Star said. “That is what IPEC is supposed to be doing.”
Lindsey Cornett has a different view. She decided to run for the board’s District 4 seat before IPEC got underway. She said the corporation has, if anything, strengthened her interest. Cornett’s campaign has brought in $17,500 in donations, most of it from individual donations but also $1,500 from the teachers union PAC, Chalkbeat partner WFYI reported.
“A big part of my job, if elected, is going to be holding IPEC accountable for what they have been tasked with delivering,” said Cornett, who criticized how IPEC plans to spend money at its Oct. 19 meeting. “I don’t think that all of these lines are necessarily clear cut.”
But ultimately, if other policymakers view IPS as “obstinate” and not compliant with what they want, then “this legislature would be quick to impose further changes and restrictions or reductions in authority,” said Spradlin, the director of the state school boards group. “That’s the risk.”
IPS school board retains control over academics, budget
While IPEC has significant power, the IPS board retains important control over the daily life of schools: It still has the power to hire and fire the superintendent, adopt curriculum, and adopt the annual budget, among other duties.
During an October forum with IPS school board candidates, several candidates said academic success and the budget remain important board responsibilities, despite the board having no control over future referendums to support those measures.
District 4 incumbent Chris Bultman, who was appointed by the board to the seat in June and is running for a full term against Cornett, said students need to be at the center of all decisions because when “there’s a lot of adults in the room bickering, kids lose.”
Bultman works for a nonprofit charter management organization and raised about $21,000, most of which was in-kind support from Stand for Children. He said in an interview he keeps his IPS board role and his charter school work separate.
“I know that kids deserve the best education they can get, and being able to do the best that I know to do with the information I have at the time I have it, to move public education along in Indianapolis is what I’m interested in,” Bultman said.
The district needs to improve academically, Bultman said, and he views accountability as a focus of IPEC and the board.
“We’re not where we need to be,” Bultman said. “Everybody can probably do a little better, and probably it’s going to be hard. We’re probably going to have difficult conversations.”
Duke Star is sitting on the school performance committee for IPEC, which will create an accountability system that could influence which schools close.
She said community messaging around IPEC is lacking, which could make it difficult to explain these new systems to the public.
“We’ve not had the opportunity to create the marketing, the storytelling, the community buy-in for what IPEC can be,” she said.
Recent IPS decisions will test its relationship with IPEC
Most candidates have also indicated they hope IPS and IPEC can work together, while others noted that IPS needs to advocate diligently for its own interests.
IPS district leaders recently opted to leave the universal enrollment system Enroll Indy that previously served charters and district-run schools, a move the board declined to reverse. The district said the move would help parents, although the state law that established IPEC says it has the authority to manage a unified enrollment system for the schools it oversees.
IPS also plans to renegotiate its contracts with Innovation Network charter schools after this school year, and will seek changes to state law allowing the district to charge more for services like transportation and maintenance. Innovation Network schools, not all of which are charters, receive services from the district but are independently operated.
District leaders view those decisions as financially prudent that will help them better serve students. But charter leaders view it as retaliation and have criticized those moves.
So far, IPEC hasn’t weighed in publicly about these moves.
The decisions about Enroll Indy and Innovation Network schools show that IPS is testing IPEC’s will, said Brandon Brown, CEO of The Mind Trust, a nonprofit that has helped incubate charter schools in the area.
He hopes the corporation upholds its “legislative responsibility” immediately by taking over management of a unified enrollment system and providing clarity on the Innovation Network schools.
Brown said his organization plans to ask lawmakers to require IPS to begin sharing property taxes earlier than the current start date of 2028 if the district can’t strike a deal with Innovation Network schools. He said IPS shouldn’t be surprised if legislators agree to do so.
“If the district wants to offload all of the costs and charge more for services funded by property taxes, yet keep all the property taxes, I would be surprised if that is a solution that flies,” Brown said.
To MaryAnn Schlegel Ruegger, a former IPS school board member, IPEC is already in essence a state takeover of the district. She said current board members are working on behalf of their community, and hopes that won’t change with the new board.
“A key responsibility for the board is to represent IPS because no one else is going to,” Ruegger said.
Duke Star stressed IPS “has to do its work” and make decisions on behalf of the district. At the same time, she said it’s crucial for the IPS board to show that it’s ready to work with others and doesn’t come across as complacent.
“We don’t want to be in a space where our community, the legislature, or anyone else is saying, ‘Well, they had this much time, and they just remain status quo,’” Duke Star said. “We don’t have that luxury. We need to show up as lean, strengthened, and prepared for whatever the next iteration of collaboration is with IPEC.”
