meaningless title really.
I suppose one could say that ANY school is a "government school" when you consider that all accredited schools have to be allowed to operate by dictate of the government.
The point that I was making, which I had thought was clear enough, is that charter schools although regulated and licensed by the government are a breed apart from the massive, generic and failing institutions that we know as public schools and are there to serve specific needs and special populations. As such, they are dramatically different from a standard public "government" school.
When a charter is granted, it becomes a contract, of sorts, between the founders of the charter school and the Board, allowing the founders broad latitude in running the school. The charter school process I was involved in a few years ago was called a "conversion charter." This is an existing public school that converts to a charter school, as compared to a new school that begins operations under its charter. Our school was already a very high-performing school, and our goal was to break loose from some of the stifling State regulations and innovate the curriculum.
Although a conversion charter school is supposed to be "fiscally neutral" to the School District, the former Superintendent squashed our charter attempt by threatening (illegally) all sorts funding sources. He won the battle, but in the long run, that's why he is the "former" superintendent now.