There are numerous beliefs on what is reasonable autonomy for charter schools. Some authorizers, in their genuine desire to see their charter schools succeed, over-reach their authority and lean toward micromanaging. Charter school operators have made some pretty big mistakes and deserve to be chastised by their authorizer. But, what happens when the rights of a charter school to operate autonomously impinge with the authorizer's desire to ensure success?
I think it's similar to parenting. Sometimes teenagers just need to learn from their mistakes. But a wise parent oftentimes lets the teenager figure it out on their own rather than making sure everything always goes right. Many people learn best by their mistakes. Certainly the likelihood of making a second comparable mistake is lessened by the freedom to make a mistake in the first place.
Similarily, a charter school governing board doesn't have to ensure the staff never makes a mistake. The board should focus on the result, rather than how the staff chooses to reach the desired outcome.
Of course a charter school should never be allowed to violate the law or harm a child in any way. But, for the most part, the philosophy of charter schools allows them to do things differently, with the optimism that the student will be better served in the long run. Authorizer, like parents, should exercise restraint in how they monitor their charter school's operations. The Charter School Institute board uses the rationale that they expect their staff to do 20% monitoring and oversight, while allowing the charter school 80% autonomy.