Representative Kim Hammer
Speaker names can be wrong. Names are identified automatically through voice matching and may contain errors. Always verify speaker attribution against the video before citing it.
Committees
No committee participation found.
Recent Meetings
Recent Transcript Excerpts
Well, and I would wonder why, if it was an issue, there wasn't a lawsuit filed
already, given the fact how long the current law has been on the books, and that has been an issue up to this time, why there wasn't a lawsuit already filed by somebody
I would wonder why, if it was such an issue, why somebody didn't file a lawsuit on that basis of contiguous districts. I don't know that it won't turn into a lawsuit down the road. I don't know. I can't predict that. We certainly don't want to make
can't be made an issue. You get a good lawyer and enough money, you can take anybody to court for anything you want to. In this case, we got taken into court because it was the sole factor of race was the reason why the lawsuit was filed in the first place.
It is not new to this bill.
you know, let's just get it all out on the table and everybody know where we are. Nobody thinks anybody's hiding anything. That's one reason
I made sure to point it out in my notes, that you would know that this bill has that as a factor in it. Okay.
To my knowledge, none. and I'll qualify that by saying that the student had to go to their school district in order to get permission to school choice out, and therefore there would have been a stopgap that would have kept that from happening, I think either on the school that was receiving or the school that was sending. So that restriction was
part of the current law as it's written now.
that would be determined by probably a good lawyer in the court as to whether there's a school district that is neighboring to them that can offer that option. And I'll just, I don't know, with all due respect, I don't know if this is where you're going, but I'll say if you want open choice, this isn't the bill. Just point blank. This isn't the bill.
It sets the ten parameters that are most commonly recognized among all those who have school choiced out, number one, or that were presently in the law somewhere, and they're all simulated into this
So, subsequently, it would either be the superintendent or the school board, ultimately, with the appeal process
think that this bill precludes anybody from being
able to go to their school and ask to be choiced out.
think it initially starts with the parent who makes the choice that they want to choice out of the school that they're in. So ultimately it starts with the parent. And then it goes, as I would understand through the process, it would go to the school that the student is going to be released to in order to go to the school they want to.
and address it in the least aggressive and insulting way. And I think that's partially what this bill does. There's nine other good reasons. Well, some aren't good because, unfortunately, by the way they are identified, as was spoken to a minute ago, they shouldn't exist in any of our schools. But in reality, they do. So we have to provide an avenue for students to be able to deal with that. Representative Viviano, you have a question, sir?
No, I don't like it. But I think the court clearly, in their opinion, has sent a signal that says it's something you need to consider. Now, I would be as a representative, if it's a heartburn to everybody around this committee, I'll pull that one out. But it will be with the understanding that into the future, if we get back in court because we pretended like something wasn't there that the court addressed as an issue, let it be known that the solution was originally presented. So I think with all due respect, we need to respectfully address the fact that that is a consideration
one in particular that said this is a factor. We have kept the fact that we have addressed the issue, But we have also provided
other options, nine other options that could be chosen above that one-tenth option so that it's not the sole reason for it. And we have incorporated it in it and shown to the court through this bill, good faith effort, that we recognize that this is an issue. Do I like that? Does anybody around this table like that?
Okay. And Scott can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he just read from one of the opinions of the justices that says that the reason we're in this situation in the first place was because race was the sole contributing factor. If we as a legislative body come back, I think, and present, and maybe it's
Bills Discussed
No bills found.