Across the nation, charter laws have spawned certain schools that are so successful they’re being replicated in other towns and states.

Nonprofit providers of these nationally acclaimed schools have been wooed and welcomed into communities hungry for better, more-effective options. The best of these models can prove their strategies’ merits with lots of encouraging data, testimonies from happy parents and impressive stories about their successful students.

These networks include the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP), Achievement First and the Green Dot Schools, among others. Pop down to New Haven, Conn., to see the thing of beauty that is the Amistad Academy run by Achievement First. Or drive up to Lynn, Mass., to take in a KIPP.

Can Rhode Island benefit from these proven successes? In a word, no.

Our laws fiercely protect Rhode Island’s educational status quo, as though it were a real treasure like Narragansett Bay or our historical architecture. The protectionist laws make it impossible for outside providers to do business in the state. (One could argue that the state laws make it impossible even for local schools to do business effectively. Certain Rhode Island charter schools are now being crushed by our protectionist culture.)

Take as only one example Rhode Island’s General Law 16-13-6 which cements teacher tenure, seniority and “bumping” into place, leaving Rhode Island administrators little if any control over the quality of their staff. No school providers from saner states can possibly assure us that they can be successful here if they can’t retain the stability of their staff and let ineffective teachers go, when necessary. Longtime Rhode Island residents have been drinking the protectionist Kool-Aid for so long they forget what effective school governance might look like.

Fortunately, a coalition of Rhode Island’s mayors, led by Mayor Daniel McKee of Cumberland, is trying to remove these obstacles so the doors can be opened to outside providers. The state desperately needs alternative options, so these municipal leaders should be enthusiastically supported. The mayors and town administrators of Cumberland, Central Falls, Lincoln and Pawtucket have endorsed a bill to tackle this problem. Municipal leaders from Johnston, North Providence and Cranston have also expressed their support.

Their proposed legislation — H7874 — amends the existing charter-school law to enable what they call Mayoral Academies, which would draw from multiple districts. The amendments would remove four obstacles to attracting national players such as KIPP into the state. In effect, the mayors want the right to let down the state’s drawbridge and welcome in public school operators with the assurance that they will not be jerked around by our nasty protectionist culture.

McKee emphasizes that the pending legislation does not ask for any state money. In fact, only if the policies are changed can he see money from the national philanthropic organizations, which view our closed-door policies as a threat to getting a return on any investment they might make in us.

McKee assures me that Nellie Mae and the Broad Foundation are keenly interested in the Mayoral Academies. But the foundations worry that the local laws can too easily impede their investment. McKee says, “The legislation allows us to deal in good faith with the foundations and with the public school providers. It allows us to speak in real terms and to negotiate in good faith.” As it is, McKee can’t close a deal.

“The changes we’re requesting are all policies that other states already enjoy,” he says. And they are:

1. The current charter law authorizes only universities, nonprofits and existing public schools, personnel or districts to apply for a charter. The new legislation would add that mayors can apply as well. And why not?

Rhode Island’s charter law has been vilified by national watchdogs for being too restrictive in its approval process. Arizona, with the most liberal authorizing process, has myriad charter schools, including many failures. I prefer Rhode Island’s careful process because a school failure radically disrupts the lives of the kids. With our tight approval process, merely including mayors as charter sponsors is no big stretch.

2. The Mayoral Academies would be allowed to structure compensation as they see fit. The current charter law insists that teachers be paid on the same lock-step schedule of raises as district teachers. Evaluations and merit are both irrelevant to pay increases. Rhode Island charter schools aren’t even supposed to kick in more money to attract or keep a much-needed math or science teacher. McKee says, “The nonprofit public education providers [like KIPP] have different strategies. Some have higher entry-level pay. So it’s definitely not about getting under-paid educators. Teachers are the most important part of this model.”

3. The academies would be allowed to offer teachers a choice between getting into the state’s pension system — so a veteran teacher could take a job and retain her state benefits — or selecting a 401(k) equivalent. The traditional defined-benefit pensions are a huge problem for young people and new teachers who are not sure how long they will stay in our small state or in the profession. They want the flexibility to be able to work without losing their retirement savings if they leave. Rhode Island has been toying with how to get more state employees on a defined-contribution retirement plan, like 401(k), and as McKee says, “This is a low-risk step into that area.”

The clever folks at the Metropolitan Career and Technical School already got permission to do this. Why not expand it?

4. Lastly, the academies would be free of seniority, tenure and bumping rules because, as McKee says, “the operators of these schools need to be reassured they can get results, so they certainly want to get the best teachers.” Doesn’t everyone?

So if you want better alternatives to our current schooling, call your legislator and urge the passage of this bill. It would definitely bring the state a bit closer to the 21st century. Why on earth would anyone want to protect our sad educational status quo?

Maybe if we let down the drawbridge and welcome outsiders, some of our own over-protected Huns will calm down, get cooperative, or retire.

Julia Steiny, a former member of the Providence School Board, consults for government agencies and schools; she is co-director of Information Works!, Rhode Island’s school-accountability project. She can be reached at juliasteiny@cox.net , or c/o EdWatch, The Providence Journal, 75 Fountain St., Providence, RI 02902.