two solutions
1) homeschool (US)
2) Charter schools

Homeschooling is a non-starter for many people, especially the over-leveraged who've moved to a "good-school" neighborhood. In any case, they're still paying "tuition" through their taxes.

Charters make more sense, I suppose, if they are ultimately prevented from secession, but that's not as easy as it sounds. We sometimes think that any group of people can throw up a charter but there are usually pretty vigorous rules regulating who can start one and where. In addition, if they don't secede, the charter is probably still covered by the home-district. That is, the leadership of the district from which they are trying to secede will be the ones who are still in leadership over the charter, and if this is a leadership struggle, then that's not what they want. Usually, districts work charters in reverse--rather than having the affluent give up their well-heeled schools with high quality amenities (think sports--something expensive like football), they usually aim the charters at the inner cities where suddenly the ambitious residents, the ones who care enough to try and get their kids bused to better schools, suddenly have closer options in better schools to keep their kids closer to home. Think about the famous charter systems in Harlem, for example, or L.A. Charters have been wickedly effective at re-segregating urban school systems with the compliance of minority communities.

IMALAHO, I get the sense that this isn't about segregation at all--the judge in the case notes that if the district can keep its desegregation obligations met then there is probably no legal obstacle to secession--but literally about local control, iow, leadership and politics. That is, preventing inner city politicians and their administrative appointees or hires from having influence over local schools.

If they do secede, then it is a net loss for the taxpayer. Now you have another parallel local school government duplicating, in some cases for just one school, the layers of executive administration that previously covered a wider geographical area. The town where I live, for example, has a separate district for the five elementary schools and one middle school, and then an entire other district for just the high school. So our town has two district superintendents, two assistant supers for curriculum and instruction, two assistant supers for operations, two separate HR and finance offices, etc. (I have no idea why. It happened long before we moved here.) Reconciliation is nearly impossible once the system has ossified because then you have reconcile labor issues and then lay off a buncha your friends and neighbors. It's almost the reverse of a divine marriage; what God has separated, let no referendum try to re-unite.

In addition, they probably have the support of whatever union they have (given that Alabama is a right-to-be-fired-state, then it's really just a mutual admiration society) because they're promising the faculty higher pay. Still, storm troopers is storm troopers.

I don't see how they lose, to be honest.

fwiw,
guacamole

I went to a charter school the parental involvement was wonderful. However I like homeschooling.

While North Carolina has crappy teacher pay, the model of charter schools and homeschools is really good there . The Public school system isn't half bad either. They do have a good education model and recognize the needs to put children and their needs first.

home schooling is not really an option when both parents work full time.

I'm not as rabidly anti-charter as I used to be. As long as they conform too the rules and don't get to break them in ways that public schools can't, then the competition is fair enough. It seems to be an inexorable tide, in any case.

fwiw,
guac.

School vouchers.

yep...

Shouldn't be a problem given that this is Deep Red Alabama, unless that's part of the desegregation law. IANAL. The article did note that the schools in question are in an affluent district, so the schools are likely top-notch. Presumably, the people want these schools, not to pull their kids out and send them to private or parochial schools.

fwiw,
guacamole

The biggest obstacle to school vouchers is BIG ED. Teachers' Unions realize they can't compete in a free market, so they'll oppose vouchers vigorously.

Not in Alabama where the union, if it exists, is toothless. In Illinois where I work, yes. In the deep red south, no. It's possible that people have other issues with vouchers, or here, want to maintain a good school and district with local control.

fwiw,
guacamole

I think you're over generalizing, or, perhaps, ignorant of the influence that BIG ED - particularly, the NEA - has on politicians, in whose hands school choice sits.

Big ed (NEA or NCT) has almost 0 pull with Republicans (i.e., Alabama). Like I said, sometimes people just want to keep the schools they have and recognize that vouchers can be an existential threat to them. Teacher's unions aren't really the only people resisting vouchers.

fwiw,
g.

How is a voucher going to be a threat to good schools?