The Senate Education Committee convened to read over the comprehensive education reform bill, 1 p.m. Friday, Jan. 25.
The proposed bill, which would bring about major reform to the state’s education system in addition to establishing public charter schools, prompted many questions from Senators.
The bill contains a large section pertaining to the formation of public charter schools, in addition to language which aids in establishing the public charter school.
Many Senators raised questions concerning this section, mainly concerning if money allocated from public charter schools would be drawn from public school boards. Rucker stated that 90 percent of a public charter school’s funding would be derived from a local public school boards.
Sen. John Unger, D-Berkeley, showed concern for the amount of public school board funding which could potentially go towards the formation of a charter school. The Senator asked how a community may choose or refuse the establishment of a public charter school, to which the committee chair called upon Emily Schultz, director of state advocacy and policy at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
Schultz explained that a charter school authorizer would have to recognize a need for the charter school within a community and then measure the desire of local citizens to establish the school. To measure this desire, the community would have to participate in public forums and gain letter of references.
The director clarified that public charter schools aren’t the answer for every community, and if citizens have no interest in establishing a charter school, planning for the school with cease.
“These schools won’t be the solution for everyone, but some have shown to have useful tool for serving students,” Shultz said.
Shultz also stated that there is a national charter school fund which could potentially allocate up to $400 million to be used for establishing schools.
When comparing public charter schools to public school systems, Shultz also discussed two differences based on food service and transportation. The committee learned that food service providers are usually contracted out for charter schools, while charter schools offer no form of transportation money. According to Shultz, transportation has historically caused a strain on charter schools.
Committee members received updated versions of the bill which contained amendments that were added following the introduction of the bill on Thursday afternoon.
The committee reviewed a nine page abstract which outlined major changes in the bill pertaining to—
- PEIA coverage
- School levy systems
- A new $250 tax credit for teachers
- A new open enrollment process
- An increase in the state’s student/teacher ratio
- Specified responsibilities for school counselors
- A modified school calendar
- A teacher’s input on the promotion of students
- Creation of separate allocations to be used for exceptional students
- A five percent pay increase for teachers and service personal, including additional pay compensation for teachers who are fully certified to teach in math classes.
- Establishment of individuals counties qualifications concerning employment
- Establishment of education savings accounts, also known as, ESA’s.
Rachelle Engen of the Institute for Justice came before the committee to explain that ESA’s are funds transferred from a treasure to the parents of a students for the use of tuition money. The money is intended to be used to cover tuition costs for online or private school and materials.
Engen explained that ESA’s have no fiscal impact on public schools and are intended to grant parents the opportunity to enroll their student in a private school.
Following a brief discussion, the Senate Education voted to report the bill out to the floor but first be referenced to the Senate Committee on Finance
