House Education Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (12)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SB956
· 4 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “Mr. Stewart, were you going to run Senate Bill 956 for Mr. Elliott? Let's go ahead and get it out of the way.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB2050
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB2050”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB337
· 3 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “…d? Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Steele, are you going to run Senate Bill 337? 337,”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB527
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “SB527”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1447
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1447”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB2049
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB2049”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB2142
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB2142”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB897
· 2 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “you, Mr. Chair. I bring you Senate Bill 897 on behalf of my senator, Senator Malone. This is just a ver…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1893
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1893”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB774
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB774”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB780
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB780”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB914
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB914”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 5, 2026
Speaker 10
0:30
Vinnie, of course, we're going to be on kind of a flexible
schedule the rest of the day and maybe in the morning. The Senate head is going to meet later today, and we may have a few more Senate bills coming back to us, maybe for concurrence or something, or House bills for concurrence. But we're just going to kind of work through those as they come. But I feel like we will probably meet at least once more during this session.
At this point, what I'm going to try to do is I know I see at least one senator in the room, and he says it's a simple deal, but you know how sometimes those senators are. But we're going to go ahead and let him run his first, and it is Senate Bill 527. Good morning,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:25
Mr. Chairman, committee members. Senate Bill 527 this is, I'll be very honest something I'm extremely proud of I don't know how familiar you guys are
with the EAST program but in Rosebud they've got one that is extremely active and at the very beginning of the session I had a group of school children that had come to me that had a friend that was abused and I guess had been abused over a long period of time and so So their thought was they need to do something about it, and this bill is the results of a lot of communication between DHS, administrators, school administrators, school board members.
And what it does, it requires annual training on identifying the signs of child abuse. And then it also, inside that, requires that they be trained on what to do after those signs are identified. and keep updated on the law, the reporting
requirements of the law. With that, I'd be happy to take any questions. Committee, questions?
Rep. Roebuck, you're recognized. Good morning, Senator.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
2:36
Good morning. My question has to do with what we're already doing in our school districts on this issue. We have 60 hours of professional development for our educators, so could you tell us what we're already doing? I don't believe there's
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:51
anything that is required currently. I understand that, but do you know what
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
2:55
we're currently offering? Let me put it that way. What are we offering in the school
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:01
district? I mean, I've seen the wheel that's got the different breakdowns of what's required in that 60 hours. This is something that, and we may, I may actually get McClure over here to speak to that,
as far as what's involved and what's required. and we're allowing them to substitute this
training in the required number of hours of staff development. So this would not be any additional hours? It would be
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
3:24
a part of the existing 60? That's my understanding. Okay. And do you have endorsement
Speaker 25
3:30
from the Administrators Association on this bill? I believe. I'm not sure if it endorsements. Yes, I've
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:36
got a thumbs up in the back. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank
Speaker 27
3:39
you, Mr. Chair. Committee, any additional questions?
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
3:46
I'm just ready to make a do pass motion at
Speaker 10
3:53
the appropriate time. Thank you. Anyone want to speak against this bill,
for this bill? Seeing none, we'll come back to the committee. We have a motion do pass by Ms. Klemmer. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Leave the ayes have it. Senator. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
Speaker 17
4:22
committee members. Let's do these concurrences first.
That would be simple. Committee, we're going to look at the top of your list. You've got four House bills, concurrences. We're
going to run those right quick. Well, I don't see Representative Hutchinson here. Ms. Hobbs, you want to go ahead and
do 1893. You'll find the bill and the amendment in your
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
4:50
packet, committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. These are agreed upon amendments by some of the people that had concerns about the bill
when it came through this committee before, and they have been amended, and I appreciate a good vote. Questions, anyone? We need a
motion to concur with amendments, and do pass. Have a motion, and all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Thank you, Mr. Todd. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank
you, committee. Ms. Roebuck. House committee, we're going to look at House Bill 2050.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
5:27
Thank you, members. I have permission of the chair to do that from here. This is my
bill and agreed upon amendment. I appreciate a good vote. Questions, committee? Seeing none, I entertain a motion. I have a motion to concur. House Bill 2050, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you, Ms. Roebuck. Let's see. House Bill 2142. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Speaker 49
5:58
On behalf of Representative Hyde, this is a great amendment to a
great bill. Questions? Seeing none, motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The ayes
Speaker 49
6:16
Chair on behalf of Representative Hutchinson Great bill, great amendment Questions committee
Seeing none, entertain a motion All in favor say aye Opposed, the ayes have it
Ms. Roebuck, you want to run House Bill 2049 You're going to do it first. You got it right there. House Bill 2049.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
7:02
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members. I wish I could tell you that this was a non-controversial bill. It is not. It is highly controversial, and it should be, because it deals with our young people that are placed incarcerated in the Department of Youth Services. It's not endorsed by anyone. In fact, it's opposed by a lot of people in this room. And so what I have decided to do is to put the bill in interim study.
But before I do that, I want to tell you some things that I have learned. Two years ago, I sat at the end of this table and asked you to put into statute a system of education for our DYS system. And you allowed me to do that. And so over the last two years, they've been working very hard with the Department of Education to make sure that that system is implemented. But it is my belief, after many, many hours of research with the Bureau and with the Department,
and with also working even today on some statistics from the Department of Human Services, that we still have very serious problems in our Department of Youth Services. And one of the reasons that I think that the interim study is going to prove so helpful is that just looking at the statistics of how many of these young people that are in our Department of Youth Services at the centers around the state end up in our Department of Corrections is absolutely unconscionable.
I'm looking at the list now. I'm looking at the chart. And at one of our centers, one-third of those children end up in the Department of Corrections. Ladies and gentlemen, we just cannot continue this. Those are our students that came out of our school districts. And I'm looking around this room at all the people that represent our public school systems, and I'm telling you, and I'm making this public, you have forgotten these children.
You don't even know who they are. I asked some superintendents last week, I said, do you know how many of your children are in DYS, in these facilities? They could not even tell me. I asked one superintendent because I knew how many he had out here at the Alexander unit, and I asked him if he were visiting those students, and he said no. So who's taking care of these kids? They came out of your school systems, and they're put into DYS. That's an incarceration, and all we're doing is grooming them for the Department of Corrections.
I told you that two years ago. We got downstairs, and some of you in this room, we got in a room, you wouldn't even talk to the department. Finally, we got the department with you. We worked out a bill. We passed it out. You have a system of education now. I come to you two years later. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not going to be here in two years, but I hope somebody will take up this cause because these are forgotten children, and they are children. I've met some of them. I've talked to them. Some of them have written to me. We are their last hope.
Now, I'm not going to tell you that DYS has not done a good job over the last two years. They have. Ron Angel and his staff, Brett Smith, is here, and I appreciate it. Thank you, gentlemen. But you have a long way to go, and we cannot do it without you working with the Department of Education. These are children, and I want to repeat, they are children. They are not adults. And I plead with you, committee, to carry this forward. Somebody on this committee that's coming back, I won't be back. Somebody needs to take up. this cause. Bubba Powers has worked with me
because he deals with these students every day in his real life. Tracy Pernartz, because she comes from a mental health background, has worked with me. And you'll see that I added them as sponsors of this bill this week because they asked me to. But we have got to do something. Mr. Abernathy, Dr. Abernathy, excuse me, is in this room, Richard. Your organization, I've told you, you need to take this on as a priority over the next two years. And I just say to you today, I'm not going to run the bill, but I honestly believe if I told the members of this committee
what I have in this folder, that they would pass this bill out and let you worry about it in your public schools because these children belong to you. They don't belong to DYS. They belong to the public schools. That's where they came out. And something happened to them. We failed them, and they ended up in DYS, and they're incarcerated in these institutions, institutions and all we're doing people, I'm looking at the statistics here. We are grooming them for the Department of Corrections. We cannot afford to do that. So I am, Mr. Chair, with your permission, I am going to pull this down.
I'm going to put it in interim study. But I want to tell you something. I'm not gone. I'm going to be here until December of 2012. And I'm going to be like a laser on this. And we're going to solve this. And when somebody comes back in two years. If we haven't solved it, I hope they'll pick this bill up, and I hope they will pass it, and I'll be here to sit at the end of this table, Mr. Chair, to testify for the bill. So with your permission, I'm going to withdraw the bill and put it into interim, but with a warning to everybody in this room,
please, please, go home to your district, Superintendents, and ask the question, how many of these children in these centers belong to me? And then go to those centers. Don't call, don't write. Go there and meet with these students and talk to them and find out why they're there. And then when they're released, you welcome them back to your public schools with open arms and help them so they do not return to those centers and then eventually go to prison. That's all I ask of you.
So I'm going to ask you to do something for me right now. Those of you in the public schools and DYS and everybody in here that agrees to help me do that over the next two years, will you please raise your hand? School Board Association, you need to be involved in this too. This is a huge problem, and I ask all of you to help me try to solve it. Thank
you, committee, and thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Roebuck, for your comments. I think I
see a few hands on the committee that will help you. Ms. Roebuck, you will run a Senate bill for Mr. Malone.
I know you got a little excited and
Speaker 50
13:30
carried away, but we love you for it. I love you all, too. Thank
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
13:39
you, Mr. Chair. I bring you Senate Bill 897 on behalf of my senator, Senator Malone. This is just a very short clarification, and it simply says that there is a prohibition against hazing, and it includes the initiation into or the affiliation with sports programs
and other extracurricular activities. So it just adds that to existing code, and I'll be glad to take
questions. Committee, questions, anyone? Seeing none, anyone in the audience wants to speak against this bill or for this bill? Seeing none, we'll come back. Committee, what is your pleasure? Do pass, Mr. Chairman. I have a motion. Do pass. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? Leave the ayes. Have it. Thank you, Mr. Robo. Thank you.
Mr. Stewart, were you going to run Senate Bill 956 for Mr. Elliott? Let's go ahead and get it out of the way.
Speaker 29
14:37
Committee Senate Bill 956. You're recognized. Yes, thank
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
14:45
you, Mr. Chair. This is Senate Bill 956 to repeal the requirement for the Department of Ed to report grade inflation. On the recommendation of the task force that studied this issue, they decided to take that part out of the school report because it was not providing accurate data. I'll give you an example.
I have seven schools in my district. Two of them reported rate inflation. They appealed it. They came back and found
out they were not rate inflators, but the damage was done. So the report and the sampling that they did was not accurate. So this is an attempt to
take that out. Thank you. Committee questions?
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
15:26
Seeing none, Ms. Clemmer? Representative Stewart, I've been involved in this a little bit, but perhaps not as long as you have, but do we not want a measure at all?
I mean, is it a faulty measure, or you just don't want us to look at
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
15:42
it? It was a faulty measure. The way they were doing this, depending on the size of your school and the way they were
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
15:51
doing the sampling, created civil errors. Well, I mean, I understand that there were people who didn't like the measure, but does that mean because we didn't have a good measure that we shouldn't measure it? Well, that was one
Speaker 78
16:01
thing. Then they determined that if we had that data, that we, it was not being, I
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
16:06
mean, we couldn't use it in the way we thought we could use it.
The intended purpose for it, the result did not lend itself to that. So in other words, they decided they don't really need this.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
16:23
But it seems that, so we'll just be using the number, we'll still be looking at the remediation rate. And the graduation rate, but you're saying we're not going to – basically we're not going to look at the number of kids that need
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
16:40
remediated versus their grades anymore. Right. And this was just a comparison between their grade point and some of the intercourse tests.
And depending on how many students you had in your school, one student could throw you out and make you a great inflator when in reality you weren't. I guess I support
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
16:59
your logic there And I'm not trying to be I don't want to sound critical I just It seems like we ought to still be looking at Whether or not there is great inflation Even if we have to improve our If we have to improve the method of which we Figure
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
17:15
that out I'm just taking the recommendation From the task force that studied this
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
17:19
And they recommended taking it out Okay Then I I mean I Again I just wanted to
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
17:30
find out what we were doing Thank you very much Rep. Carnine. I think the comment's right, but I remind the committee, because I think this is a concern generally, that the statistical analysis that was utilized was flawed, and I think based on that, really we have no other choice but not to utilize it because of the flaw.
and the author of that, in fact, indicated that it was never his intention that it be utilized in the way that it was. So saying all of that, wouldn't you agree, Mr. Stewart? Yes, it was used
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
18:03
as a punitive measure and was flawed, so we decided to get rid of
it. Any other questions, committee? Seeing none, we'll go to the audience. Anyone want to speak against this bill,
for this bill? Mr. Harder, you're recognized. Come to the table.
Speaker 91
18:21
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I was on the Great Inflation Committee,
Speaker 92
18:31
and the point that I would like to mention in response to Representative Klemmer's question, among the flaw was that it was a one-way Great Inflation. So that if you got a C or a B or above, but didn't get proficient on your end of course, you were rate inflated.
But if you got a C, the opposite didn't work. So that if you got a C or below and were proficient on the end of the course, there was no credit given for that. So that it was a very unclean system and not truly representative of what the intent was. So we support the bill. Questions,
anyone? Thank you, Mr. Harder. Anyone want to speak
against this bill, for this bill?
Seeing none, committee, what is your pleasure? Have a motion do pass. All those in
favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Steele, are you going to run Senate Bill 337? 337,
Speaker 95
19:59
committee, Senate Bill 337. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and committee.
Over the last couple of sessions, we have,
Speaker 96
20:05
I think, done an outstanding job of funding early childhood education. I think in one session in the tune of over $40 million and I think we came back to the next session and over $20 million. But the one thing we haven't done is evaluated the effectiveness of this extremely important program. And that's all this bill does. It sets up an evaluation process so we'll know how the programs are going and based
on the criteria from curriculum, training, adult-to-child ratio, and using the federal standards that are already in place. Committee,
questions? Ms. Hobbs, you're recognized. Thank
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
20:48
you, Mr. Chair. And Representative Steele, I apologize. I haven't read through the entire page yet. But when it says early childhood program, what defines an early childhood
Speaker 95
20:59
program? Well, that's from programs that are funded out of ABC Commission.
Speaker 96
21:04
That's where we sent the money. Okay. So these are educational programs. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. age, Mr. Chairman, you make it happen to me, three and four, three and four years. Another federal program that starts a little earlier that was funded by stimulus
Speaker 100
21:20
money, but our money goes to three and four-year-olds. Okay, so we're not talking just
Speaker 96
21:24
daycares then? Right. When we say childhood programs. Thank you. Well, not daycares, but
Speaker 101
21:28
child care facilities with educational programs. Right. Okay. Thank
you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any other questions, Committee? Seeing none, anyone in the audience wants to speak against this bill, for this bill?
Committee, what is your pleasure? If a motion do pass, all of
them in favor say aye. Opposed? I believe the ayes have it. Thank
you. Thank you, Commissioner Steele. Ms. Salmon about Senate Bill 780.
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
22:40
Thank you, Mr. Chair. 774 has been often referred to as the Tebow bill,
participation of homeschool students in activities. There's been a lot of work done on this bill.
It's obviously at this stage, I would suspect that most of us say it's the early stages, and yet I would suggest to you that it is a may, it is not a shall, and the fact that it is my personal belief that goes beyond this that we ought to, rather than divide and separate homeschool students from regular students,
we ought to try to find ways in which we could actually partner. In the reality of a homeschool, I know this is probably getting a little bit off the center course of 774, But in the reality, most parents, at least they've shared with me, that they're not necessarily, as they have decided to homeschool, an expert in all areas. And so they would like, in some ways, through a number of different venues,
to have some way that they could acquire that through the public school system, which I believe this helps us set that up. And I say that by saying that I'm really suggesting academic in one hand, but on the other hand, I find extracurricular activities is one of the venues that does, in fact, set up a partnership. Originally, when we had this bill, I thought we had everybody on board that they were going to be okay and love this particular piece of legislation.
Well, that's not quite the truth, because in reality there are still divides within the educational community on whether we should allow homeschool students to participate in extracurricular activities, whether it be athletics or whether it be music or art or whatever. It's my point that this is a good bill that should see the light of day, that we ought to encourage this partnership in the state of Arkansas for all kids. And so I bring that to you today to say I hope that you will, in fact, provide an opportunity to this bill to be seen on the floor of the House today.
Speaker 95
25:43
you have a question? Motion at the proper time. Committee, Ms. Steele. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Carline, can you explain to me
Speaker 96
25:55
mechanically, I guess more logistically, how this would work? Would the kids be required to be at the school facility when these extracurricular activities take place, cheerleading, sports activities?
activities, and let me go ahead and ask my second question. And would they have and be under the same requirements and rules as the kids who are in school? For example, if a kid is homeschooling and has a test and late for practice, doesn't show up for the PEP assembly, and would they be held to the same standards as the kids who are
Speaker 95
26:39
in public school? I have a short answer, yes. Good. And I needed one or two more short answers. Who would
Speaker 96
26:51
then monitor the kids' activities and are the academic portion of home school as readily available as kids who are in public schools?
For example, when I was playing sports, we would be penalized if we didn't go to class or we didn't get our homework in on time. Oftentimes either you wouldn't start for the basketball game, even if it was severe enough you wouldn't play in the basketball game. You could often be penalized if you were late to class or if you did something in the cafeteria. How are those things measured to make it an even playing field, so to speak,
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
27:38
Well, I don't know if there's a short answer to that. Because I think you're going to have to look at it from the standpoint that I believe that most parents have the best interest in mind for their children, period. period. So I suspect that most parents would then say to their child, these are the requirements for you to continue to participate in this activity.
And if you fail to do so, then I will inform the principal and the coach that you will not be there. Now, I don't know about your parents, but my parents, and of course obviously I was in a public school at the time, but my father and my mother both, in fact, because I was more interested in sports sometimes than I was in my academic work, made it very clear to me that if I didn't do what I was supposed to do in the classroom, there was no question I was not participating. Now, I believe that many, many parents are like my parents were.
So I have no hesitancy in saying I think that will also obviously give those parents a way of saying to their children, this is important. Sometimes we lose our perspective as children in terms of what's important, and I think parents, obviously, if they do due diligence,
will utilize that to ensure that their children keep up with their work
Speaker 95
29:05
and do the right things. So is the parent then the ultimate authority on the child's participation,
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
29:12
or is the coach? Well, I think obviously the coach in the final analysis, but I do think that gives the parent the ability to say to the child, if you do not, much like many public school parents do right now. I mean, there's no question. I've heard this on and on. As you well know, I have over 45 years in education, and I've heard many, many parents, regardless of whether they're public school or homeschool, tell kids this is what's going to happen, and you understand that I mean every word of it.
Now, there are those, obviously, are not going to take the responsibilities of parent as much as I would like them to. I think all of us sometimes self-responsibility is lacking. But I believe this is, again, a good start on continuing to try to pull together rather than apart. So you're saying that they will be held to the same standards,
Speaker 96
30:18
even on activities that are done in between the school year, football practice before school starts, the summer, the two-a-day or sometime. Well, I think we limit it here to two-a-day. You can't do three-a-days anymore. But they will be subject to the same requirements as kids
Speaker 115
30:40
who are in public school. As close as possible.
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
30:43
The answer is yes. They should be held to the same regulations, the coaches, whatever the coaches have set apart.
I actually don't think athletics is the key issue here. I think more kids will participate in the other activities than they probably will in athletics. Now, only time will tell if that's the truth, But I think music and many other activities will be really the
barometer of how much participation takes place. And you've been our
Speaker 96
31:18
superintendent here. Would you have been for this bill while superintendent of the Little Rock?
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
31:24
Yes. In fact, I've advocated more for all kinds of virtual learning
and other things is to tie public schools, home schools, private schools, and charter schools together rather than I think there's a way for all of us to work together because ultimately we educate all the kids of the state. We should not be as divisive. We should find areas that we can build together for the better of the state and for our youth, period.
Speaker 121
31:56
The answer is yes. And I was not insinuating when I said you were my superintendent that I was in
Speaker 95
32:03
school while you were superintendent, but you
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
32:08
were in my district. Thank you, Mr. Trabert. Well, actually, Representative
Steele, I thought you were. Mr. Carnine, it looks like that the student and the parent must sign agreements that they will abide by all the normal school rules and regulations for whether they're taking a hard class.
Speaker 127
32:27
Correct, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Now, you mentioned that everyone
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
32:33
wasn't on board. Who is not on board? Well, I think that there is, again, a separatism if you homeschool a child to a certain degree, that you're not pleased with the public schools, you're upset with the public schools, or whatever. And I'm sure that's the case in some instances. However, I do not believe that many people that homeschool really are, in fact, of that mindset.
So my point is that there are going to be people that don't agree with this, both from a homeschool and from a public school. It is we are blazing, you might say, some new areas here. And, again, my thesis is that we ought to be partners rather than dividers. And it looks like the
principal is the one that's going to be caught in between the rock and hard place. He's the one that makes the final approval or disapproval of
Speaker 128
33:26
that student attending. Is that correct? She might.
He or she might. I want to make that clear because...
along. Okay. I think I saw another hand. Ms. Clemmer, you had a question.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
33:45
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And this does not alleviate the need for, I mean, if it's a sport that you have to try out for, you still have to try out, correct?
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
33:57
That's correct. It does not guarantee participation.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
34:01
And I guess my other thought, and perhaps I really hadn't thought about this, and I'm wondering if you would agree, you said something about building bridges. do you see scenarios, at least the possibility of a scenario, where a student might participate in extracurricular and then decide that he wanted to go to a public school because of the gap that was being
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
34:28
bridged? I think that is correct.
I think there are also what I was trying to suggest, particularly in virtual areas where it may be a situation in which they may want to take their physics class, they may need a chemistry class, a calculus class, and where, again, depending on their areas, that, no, I do believe this is the way it should be. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Jody Dickinson
Unverified
35:06
Mr. Chair. However, if a school has a no pass, no play, and that no play means not necessarily just physical sports, but choir, band, whatever. And their grades are readily available. And on the very day of an activity, they fail a test.
They don't play. Would the homeschoolers' grades be that available and the same rules apply to them? Because that's my question.
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
35:50
Well, and thank you, Representative Dixon. I do understand that that could be part
of some issues right now in which it's not exactly the same.
where this sets up that each semester the child's eligibility would, in fact, be decided, that they must be at grade level and producing academically in that way by a norm reference exam. There are schools that do keep a daily or weekly, like you suggested, And, of course, that would be, I think, where the parent and the school probably need to sit down
and talk through that, how they might want to handle that aspect of it. But that is one of the complications that we have not been able to see. I don't really think that in the long run that that ought to discourage us from moving ahead. But I do understand your question, And I do think that's one of the reasons that not everybody is absolutely jumping up and down and saying this is the greatest thing. I think it's
a move in the right direction personally.
Speaker 142
37:05
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Dale. Representative Carnine, would you discuss
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
37:17
the revenue impact, please? If you notice in this, it says that a homeschooled student
who participates in interscholastic activity may be counted as an enrolled student by the resident school district for prorated average daily membership funding purposes. In other words, I would suspect that if they have an athletic period, a physical education,
like that that they would in fact be counted I mean that's and again I hope that as we blaze these trails that more of that partnership could be developed and maybe it will be athletics to do that very thing or again as I've said I think in many times it would be music because you're obviously if you're going to participate in marching band and in music you're going to have to be in the school to be able to do that it's just not going to happen are there funds available
now for it is my understanding that this is revenue neutral and
Speaker 142
38:25
that yes there are funds available to it how
Speaker 145
38:29
will the principal know I'm sorry how will the principal know whether there are funds available I mean
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
38:37
how does I don't even think the principal has to be concerned about that obviously the state if this passes obviously that'll be a consideration and overall state funding you know I as much as we like to think
we are able to budget to the penny and to actually know exactly how many students show up each year we're always a little surprised of how close we are or how far we're apart so thank you for that question though it's a good one Representative Stewart. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. I can tell you who's
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
39:11
not on board, all my superintendents. They say, if my school is not good enough for you to go to school here, our sports aren't good enough for you either. And I'll give you some of their concerns.
You know, we base all of our scholarships on grades and their grade point. And when you're a student in a regular school and you have to go through the classes and you have ball practice after school then you go to the ball game and you get back at 11 30 that night the next morning at o'clock you may have a test and you're going to have to take that test and it's your grades probably going to suffer a little bit because you're at that ball game our my superintendents feel like the homeschooler who's going to play that ball game is going to go home and not have to take that test the next morning mama's going to say well go ahead and
sleep in and take that test or they won't even have a test that day but later on when we get ready to grade them for scholarships for the we talked yesterday about the governor scholarship you look at your grade point you look at your atc scores so we're not creating a level playing field if you look at this law it also covers it covers lots of things the triple a covers things such as your band your beta club student council cheerleading a lot of your special interest clubs chess they're all there you're going to have kids
coming and going throughout the day, you know, picking and choosing. They're cherry-picking what they want out of the public school, but they don't want to go to class in a public school. So my superintendents are not for it. And they were also concerned that the law says the principal makes a decision. You're taking the school board completely out of this. You know, the one guy has to say so. yes or no, the superintendent and the school board has no say-so whatsoever.
And that's taking the local control out to some extent and putting it on the shoulders of that one guy. So that's just, you know, from my perspective, and I'm kind of like them. My three kids all went to public school. They had the rigors of going to school and participating in many, many school activities. But I don't see what would be a level playing field if you're going to have somebody just come in and pick and choose what they want to participate in. All right. Thank you. Is that a wouldn't you agree?
Speaker 83
41:27
Wouldn't you agree that taking the school board out was maybe a
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
41:33
mistake? Not necessarily because I think particularly in most of our communities and school districts, the superintendent and the principal and the school board work in concert. That's not true in every place, I understand, but that's the way it should be. It ought to be a team. So I think the thought process of the superintendent, the principals, and the school board normally
in most of our schools are very closely aligned. I don't really think that's a problem. And actually, I hope that Senator Baker will set in on this if there's any other questions. He's actually the primary author, along with worked a long time with school administrators and people to get this off board,
and I only volunteered to step in to make sure it got run today. Mr. Baker.
Speaker 151
42:33
Yes, and I was just wandering by. Representative Carney is doing a great job, and I literally just came in to say hello. The question that came
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
42:46
we take the school board out of the formula and only allow the principal
Speaker 153
42:51
to be the one making the decision? Sure. We wanted some level of accountability for some person to weigh in at the administrative level. And to a little broader point, but I think relates to your question, Representative Stewart,
keep in mind that currently under law, any home-educated child can come into that school and take that class, and many do. They take band. They take, if it's a PE class, it's related to some kind of sport. They take right now, under law, they do that. They do it all the time. And the school is paid pro rata per that class. They get the one-eighth or two-eighths, depending on how many classes they take. All this bill does, the only thing it does, is to allow that young homeschool person,
who right now can take band and does take band in many public schools as a class. When they go to their little contest, this bill would then allow that child to compete at the contest. It's strictly a AAA thing. We're not changing anything about how a homeschooled child right now can go to a public school and take class. They do it right now. They do it all the time. And the state pays that school on a prorated basis for that child. This is just about then being able then to compete at the band contest or at the chess competition or whatever.
So we're not changing anything, anything relating to that homeschool kid taking a class. They can do that now and will continue to do that. It's just under current Arkansas law, the AAA wouldn't let them compete at the band competition or the choir competition or the basketball competition, whatever. So as we just tried to get the competition, we still wanted to make sure that some administrator could weigh in on that, and that's why the principal, just the building administrator, was chosen.
Good question. Mr. Klemmer, I have you down for a question. Okay. Thank you.
Committee, any additional questions? Seeing none, we'll go to the audience. So anyone want to speak against this bill, against this bill? anyone want to speak for this bill no one want to speak against the force of committee we're back to you what is your pleasure
Ms. English I'm sorry you had a motion do pass a while ago I believe is
that correct yes thank you committee we have a motion do pass all in favor
say aye aye opposed no I believe it failed okay I see two hands Okay, I guess we'll roll call it, Mr. Hudson.
Speaker 163
45:46
Representative Bradford. Representative Webb. Representative Webb. Representative Pierce. Representative Hutchinson. Rep. Hutchinson. Rep. Stewart. Rep. Brown. Rep. Baird. Rep. Summers. Rep. Hobbs. Rep. Carnine.
Rep. Dale. Rep. Hopper. Rep. Hopper. Rep. Klemmer. Rep. McLean. Rep. McLean. Rep. Dickinson. Representative English Representative Steele Representative Wren Representative Roebuck Mr. Carnide, I'm sorry
your bill has failed
I'll leave you at 7-4 Committee at this time We'll look at Senate Bill 780 by Senator Salmon.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
47:25
Dr. Salmon, if you'll notice on
that, it's just an addition to the code on page 2. It does deal with our professional development for special education teachers and teachers who teach students with disabilities. You'll notice on lines 18 and 19, the only change is that we add to that list that the professional development provides educators with knowledge and skills needed to teach students with disabilities, including, without limitation, autism. just an addition to that list. Mr. Chair, I'll be glad to take questions.
Committee, any questions? Seeing none, we'll go to the audience. Anyone want to speak against this bill, for this bill? Committee, what is your pleasure? Do pass, Mr. Chair. Have a motion,
Speaker 90
48:13
do pass. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Thank
you, Mrs. Roebuck. Thank you. The only other bill we have on our agenda today, I believe, is Senate Bill 914.
And we'll start this, of course, it won't matter, but I'm going to have to get up and leave in a few minutes. And Ms. Roebuck, I'm sure, will do an excellent job of chairing the rest of this. But I'll stay as long as I can.
Speaker 175
48:50
But I've got a meeting on the other end of the building, Mr. Gilbert. Your
Speaker 177
48:55
recognized potential bill. This is a general public school choice bill that we brought here, made some tweaks, amendments toward the end of the session.
Speaker 153
49:05
From a personal perspective, as over the years as I would bump into different families that wanted to move from one public school to another public school for different reasons, be it employment or whatever reasons, more often than not, they would bump into a race provision relating to their ability to move from one school to the other, and it worked both ways. It wasn't always because of the white population or black population.
It worked, again, it went both directions, and it just seemed inherently wrong that that was the front and center provision in moving from one public school to another public school. And, of course, you know the court has ruled that you cannot have race as your determining factor. The attorneys that testified on the other end, on both sides of the issue, from Little Rock to Camden Fairview, different attorneys, made the point that the last thing this legislature needs to do is to turn it over to the court
and that the one remedy we could take care of was the remedy that's before you now. The Little Rock attorney did make the caveat that he was concerned about no transportation money. And it is ironic that everything we seem to do around here relating to education relates to transportation. It's surreal. But anyway, I bring before you this bill, obviously, to make sure that we didn't bump into any deseg issues. You see that all the districts that have desegregation issues are exempted out of this public school choice.
But the other districts, we simply want to have let families have the opportunity to move from public school to another and not have race be the determining factor. I'd be glad to try to
answer any questions. Committee, questions on this bill? Mr. Stewart.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
51:02
Yes, I'm just not sure I understand paragraph 7. You've kind
of, Mr. Sinterbaker, the following 48 schools, tell me exactly what that does to those 48 schools that's listed here.
Speaker 151
51:15
They would not be allowed to exercise full public school choice
Speaker 153
51:19
without the race factor in there because they have been under previous DSEG. and so we can't give them that freedom to do because they've had previous desegregation issues. So then the remaining schools then would
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
51:34
have pretty well just a basic freedom to
Speaker 178
51:38
public school choice across the board. Yes,
Speaker 153
51:40
sir. Thank you. And the point was brought up that if any district moves into a deseg situation,
then they would be exempted out as well, excluded from the opportunity.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
51:55
Mr. Obuck. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senator. Good morning. MR. Hey. I just wanted you to tell us we currently
Speaker 25
52:02
have choice, and so just tell me why we need this particular bill. MR.
Speaker 153
52:07
We currently have public school choice with the exception of the race provision. And I'm not saying I'm an expert in it, but I have bumped into it time and time again
that a certain student in Valonia is not allowed to move to the Greenbrier District or to the Conway District or Conway District back to Valonia based on a racial makeup. An African-American child couldn't move from one district to the other or a white child couldn't move from one district to the other because it would disrupt some racial balance. And the courts have said you can't do that. I mean, the court has ruled that if race is your determiner there,
that it's unconstitutional. And of course, even we have our state Supreme Court is about to rule on that right now. And if we don't, if we're not proactive in this, then we do what I know none of us want, and that is to let the courts be active in our schools
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
53:07
in that, to that regard. If I could have a follow-up, Mr. Chair. So I'm looking at
this list on page two all the way through on page three, and I'm looking at the four districts that I represent, and they are not listed. Right.
So, in other words, then in my district, all of those school districts would be open choice. Public school
Speaker 153
53:30
choice, yes. Yes. Which they are now, with the exception of that race proviso, which
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
53:36
has been declared unconstitutional. Okay. All right. And so, could you tell me why my
Speaker 52
53:42
four superintendents oppose this bill? No, I couldn't. Maybe they
Speaker 153
53:46
want to have, again, I would be remiss to try to speak.
Speaker 151
53:52
All I know is that the two attorneys that represented the district, the attorney for Camden Fairview and then the attorney for Little Rock, and both attorneys probably hate that I'm up here trying to represent them. I don't know, are they here? Oh, I'm sorry, guys. If I wander off, they can sure get up here and correct. But for differing reasons, they just made the point that the last thing we want to do is let the court
Speaker 153
54:15
make the final determination here, and our Supreme Court is about to rule. And, again, it's been ruled unconstitutional that you can use race like that.
Speaker 27
54:24
Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
54:29
Chair. Mr. Stewart, I guess I'll follow up on the same question on paragraph 7. I noticed that it's the
school board of directors of that school district that determine whether or not they will be able to opt in or opt out. Do they get guidance from the Department of Education on if they are bound by any regulations on this, on the racial? MR. Yeah, they
Speaker 151
54:54
would – from my view, they'd be absolutely silly not to, and to make sure
that they were adhering to – you're talking about how they're unclear about a former DSEG status or something like that? MR. Yes. Yes. school district that is just recently
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
55:07
consolidated, it changed their whole, you know, whole ratios and makeup, and now they're under, they're having
to listen to the Department of Education to what they can do, what they can't do, how they must zone, and et cetera. But the way I read this, the Board of Directors makes a decision, what if it's contrary to what the ADE says? Well, they're going to be in trouble. I mean,
Speaker 189
55:28
if they're running afoul of D-Sec, and we make it very clear in there that if
That if someone, if a district, because
Speaker 151
55:35
of consolidation or because of population shifts or for whatever, comes under the purview of a DSEG order,
Speaker 153
55:40
then they are excluded from the opportunity for full public school choice. So the choice that the school board
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
55:51
makes, and it says it locks them in for three years as irrevocable, would still be predicated on whether or not they are following advice of the ADE. Right. If they make that determination in error, they're going to be in court.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
56:05
If they make that in error, they're going to be in court. Okay. Thank you. Members, other questions for Senator Baker? If not, we'll go to the audience. Are there members of the audience that wish to speak against this bill? I believe Clay Finley from the Little Rock School District. You're first. You're speaking against
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
56:32
the bill. Change attorneys on me now. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Committee. I'm Clay Finley, representing the Little Rock School District.
We just saw this bill for the first time yesterday, and our concerns about it, I guess, continue to grow. I guess, first and foremost, you're probably asking, well, Little Rock's exempt. Why are we here talking about it? The reason is the state is in the process of trying to end the inter-district desegregation case concerning Little Rock, and if the state is successful in that regard, we would no longer be exempt under this act, and we have real concerns about our ability to maintain
a desegregated school system if we were subject to the School Choice Act. We already have some experience with school choice in Pulaski County with a number of charter schools, and our experience there is that due to the lack of transportation, the students that take advantage of the choice opportunities are the more affluent students, and that has led to affluent students leaving schools and increasing the proportion of free
and reduced lunch students in our schools. Right now currently the Little Rock School District is 70 percent free and reduced lunch students. The problem that that leaves is that it increases the proportion of high poverty schools and as you are all aware, it's very difficult to provide a good educational environment in a high-poverty environment.
The kind of a general concern we have about the bill is the lack of any sort of definition of what desegregation obligations are. I think Scott Smith testified in the Senate yesterday that a number of these school districts listed on the list, it's not even clear what exactly their desegregation obligations are. Another general concern is there are a number of districts and some number of districts
in the state that now aren't able to participate in School of Choice because of the 10 percent minority requirement that will be opened up to School of Choice if this bill passes. I think that this is something that really needs to be studied before we just open the door up to open choice. There are going to be situations, I believe, where more affluent students who can take
advantage of the choice opportunities and provide their own transportations may segregate themselves in certain school systems and leave behind a school system which will be substantially consisted of students in poverty. I don't think that's the outcome anybody wants, but based on our experience in Little Rock, that is what is likely to happen. Thank you. If there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer those. Members,
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
59:50
do you have questions for Mr. Finley?
Thank you. Next, to speak for, Alan Roberts. Others coming
with you, if you would all identify yourselves for the record. Mr. Watson, into the mic, please, sir.
Speaker 202
1:00:28
Bob Watson, Superintendent Elvira. One more time. Bob
Speaker 203
1:00:45
Watson, Superintendent Elvira. Jerry yes superintendent Camden and mr. Roberts if you'd identify yourself for
Speaker 204
1:00:49
the record I'm Alan Roberts and I represent I'm a lawyer that represents both these school districts Elrida school district Camden Fairview school district they in turn represent other similarly situated districts all in
South and East Arkansas Central Arkansas you're
Speaker 204
1:01:06
the bill It is late. This bill, as I spoke yesterday at the other end of the Capitol, is not a beauty contestant because it's a compromise, and it's a compromise that was worked out really over the past three years from the time that the constitutionality of our existing choice statute became not
just suspect but pretty certain that it was going to fall. The parties to the compromise were Scott Smith and Luke Gordy and the reform organization that they represent and the South and East Arkansas school districts that Mr. Watson, Jerry Gess and I represent. And they're the districts that by past desegregation history have been demonstrated to have white
flight problems and continue to have white flight problems and were protected by the legislature under the existing choice statute. The essence of this compromise bill as we see it is exactly what Senator Baker said, and that is to decide whether or not the Arkansas General Assembly is going to decide the student assignment, student attendance policies of the public schools of Arkansas, whether or
not the federal court in Fort Smith is going to decide it, or Hot Springs, it's the same court. The court had the constitutional question before
Speaker 210
1:02:54
it almost three years, two years ago. The judge deferred
Speaker 204
1:02:59
reaching the merits on a procedural ground. The party, a party that had been sued was not the correct party. There's a strong implication, inference, invitation by the judge to the General Assembly to please
Please correct this problem because the overwhelming probability is that the statute is going to be unconstitutional. If the statute is unconstitutional, the results vary from one extreme to the other. You've got a school choice statute now that says anybody can go where they want to unless the racial filter catches them. That is, a black child cannot go from a resident school district to a school district that's
black or a white child can't make that move either. That's the law. As Senator Becker said, that in all probability is unconstitutional. When that decision comes out, the court has two choices. It can throw the whole statute out, which means you have no school choice. he goes to school in the school district where they live, or he can strike the racial restriction only, which means you have free and unrestricted school choice. Free and unrestricted, this
Speaker 211
1:04:21
compromise I talked about, free and unrestricted school choice is a pet
Speaker 204
1:04:25
of the people that we negotiated with. I think everybody should be able to do it. People that I represent I think you ought to go to school in the district where you live. It wasn't an easy compromise. Obviously, it took a long time. As I've already told you, it ain't very pretty, but it's there. Now, in regard to some specific points that were made, the filter that we put in here depends exclusively on the local board.
Little Rock School District is on the list, And if this statute is written, it will stay on the list as long as this statute is in the
Speaker 209
1:05:13
books. Its board will decide whether or not its DSEG obligations, its local board will decide whether its DSEG obligations are hurt by free and unrestricted choice. they decide they are, they opt out, they can neither receive
Speaker 204
1:05:29
nor let students leave under
school choice. There are no questions of interpretation. The 48 districts that are on here represent the best research efforts of the Arkansas Department of Education, myself, and some other lawyers to identify every district that's ever been in a DSAG case in Arkansas. And to the best
Speaker 209
1:06:00
of my knowledge and information and belief, as I sit here before you, that's
it. Those are the 48. That
Speaker 204
1:06:09
was a concern of Mr. Gordy and Mr. Smith, that the list not be ever expanding so we say fine write them all down again our view is that either alternative of a court decision of unconstitutionality will be undesirable if you have no more school choice according to what I was told yesterday morning fifteen thousand seven hundred and seventy children who
are now attending a different school under choice won't be able to the next next day. If on the other hand, you have the racial restriction only stricken, then you will have what these gentlemen will tell you will be a real white flight problem in the existing school districts of South Arkansas. These are all districts that we are talking about that are in counties with substantial African-American population and multiple school districts, including school districts, that
are racially identifiable in terms of being blacker or whiter than a neighbor. And the white flight, I don't think the fact question remains in dispute. It would occur like it has in Little Rock. And that's the purpose that we're trying to do. The masters that we're trying to serve here are, on the one hand, to prevent resegregation of school districts in Arkansas that have been subject to that anathema for a long time
and finally got over it, and to preserve free choice for as many people as possible that don't run into that. We think the compromise that we've come up with is as good I'm going to quit apologizing for it. It's as good as can be done with those two absolutely diametrically opposed interests. They're balanced as well as it can be. And the other master that this bill serves is the federal constitution because we've
looked into it. We have an unequivocal opinion from the Mark Killingbeck, who is a constitutional law professor at Fayetteville Law School. He believes and has stated that the existing law is unconstitutional and that this law is constitutional and will withstand a court test. I would ask if either superintendent has something to add
Speaker 212
1:08:49
to that, fine, I'll try our questions if anybody has any.
Speaker 25
1:08:54
Okay, we'll allow Mr. Watson and Dr. Guest to make
Speaker 221
1:09:02
comments. Mr. Watson. I appreciate the time. You know, we are here dealing with an issue that's very difficult, and trying to get people to agree in these kinds of environments is absolutely one of the most difficult experiences I've ever been through. I'm in a school district with a little over 4,600 young people. I am 52% minority in that district.
I have been in that district for 37 years. I've been 26 years superintendent in that district. I've seen a district make every effort to be sure that it's offering the very best that it can to its young people. Everything from getting involved in partnerships in order that the Elder Raid of Promise would be put in place. that students who complete in our system will get their college tuitions and fees paid. I've seen us, we're building a new high school.
We have hired, we've had a partnership with the Education Foundation in which we're bringing in experts in the discipline areas to advise and to give direction to our programs. We have grown in our AP classes. We've done as much as we can do to make our program attractive to young people and to their parents. And we continue to strive to do that. We feel the burden to do that. One of the things that has helped us while we are doing that has been the present school choice law.
And that law has basically said you can't go to another district where your race is in greater number. The realism at this point is that that law will go away. So we sit here as a school district who's trying to offer the very best that it can for its young people and say that's not important, that everything we've done has overcome that and that race is no longer an issue. That's the burden I carry as superintendent in evaluating.
I can tell you without a doubt that has not gone away. I deal with it every day in my job. I was in my office Monday and Tuesday of this week and dealt with it. I hate to sit here and tell you in the world that we live in today that race trumps all other things. It trumps the quality of the program. It trumps the good people that are working hard. It trumps how much money you spend.
It's one that does it. But the realization of that, and I look at the districts that are around me, I see those that are basically 25% minority. I'm sitting here at 52. One small district is with me. And I have to realize, if we're going to continue to do the very best we can for our young people and be sure we don't resegregate the schools, it's important we address the issue that's in front of us. And that's the reason I'm here.
I wish there was a perfect solution that everyone would feel comfortable with. Don't see that solution out there. I really feel like if I don't speak up, give it consideration, put it in front of people, then I'm short of criminal in my job. It is an important thing, and I ask that you support this bill because it's the best thing we can get our hands on right now, number one. Number two, I really don't want the courts giving me direction.
I'd rather be in court defending it later than being given direction. So
Speaker 1
1:12:45
I ask for your support for this bill. Thank
Speaker 223
1:12:51
you. Dr. Gess. Thank you, Dr. Roebuck. I don't think there's anything I can add.
Speaker 224
1:12:57
Mr. Watson has brought all the passion to the table that needs to be expressed, addressed, and he's brought the truth in a very dramatic form. The decision of this committee today as to whether or not this goes to the House for
the consideration on the floor is essentially a decision about whether or not this issue can be solved statutorily or whether or not it will be resolved in a federal court. The federal court decision, we think, will go one of either two ways. Under unlimited choice, which we think would resegregate much of the state quickly, or no choice at all, which is unacceptable to a lot of our colleagues in my business.
As Attorney Roberts mentioned, almost 16,000 kids are currently in the choice pipeline. We think that they would immediately return to the district where they live as opposed to the district where they have choiced. Yesterday, Senator Cheatham said it ought to be easier than this. We have worked for three years to come up with some position to allow the solution to be statutory rather than through that court decision.
We think it's critical that you understand the consequences that are on the table today. Thank you. Members, are there questions
Speaker 148
1:14:23
for Mr. Roberts, Dr. Gess, or Mr. Watson? Questions from members? Representative Stewart, you're recognized.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:14:29
Yes, thank you. Dr. Watson, I'm still trying to figure
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
1:14:38
out this 48 list. If the court rules that the racial filter is going to be removed,
then in your district, you're on this list. Okay, you're one of the 48. How will that affect kids either being admitted to your school or transferring out, white or black? Tell me how that will affect you with this current legislation.
Speaker 227
1:15:05
As I understand it, right now the choice is based on whether you can go to a district where your race is in greater number. This basically says that our local school board will have the responsibility to evaluate its DSEG order,
along with its attorney and with the department, to determine if that's something that can occur and under what circumstances. And if that could occur, then the board would make that decision, and it would be voted on every three years. Okay, so you'd make
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
1:15:38
the choice then, and that would take the ratio out completely, and y'all would make a decision to admit them or let them go. That could occur, yes, sir. Yes, it could. Okay, all right, thank you.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:15:53
Gentlemen, I said earlier that there are four superintendents that I represent, and they are opposed to this bill, and I want to ask you, I asked Senator Baker, why would they be opposed, Mr. Watson? I think there's a
Speaker 227
1:16:06
good number of superintendents in state, and as far as that goes, anybody in education or in the public that would like open movement, just anybody going anywhere they can. Some of them could fall into that category. I think there's a number of them that would like to hold on to what we presently have, hoping that it will pass the test of the court, and we don't have to change it.
So I think there's some people in that camp as well. I don't know about other categories, but those are the two I hear most frequently.
Speaker 25
1:16:41
So then it's your testimony that you are speaking for your district and your district only. That's
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:16:48
speak for. And, Dr. Gass, is that your testimony you're speaking only for Camden Fairview? Yes, ma'am. So there are superintendents that oppose this bill? There are, absolutely. Thank you for clarification. Any other questions for these gentlemen?
Okay, we're going to go back to the audience, and we have Rich Nagel from the Arkansas Education Association that will speak against the bill. Representative Steele. Yes, Madam
Speaker 95
1:17:22
Chair, while he's coming, do we have the Attorney General's office here today?
Speaker 119
1:17:26
And just at some point, if we don't, maybe we can get them here so that we can have
Speaker 225
1:17:33
them. MS. We will do that, Representative Steele. Thank you. Mr. Nagel, if you will identify
Speaker 97
1:17:40
yourself for the record, and then you are recognized. MR. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm Rich Nagel, Executive Director of the Arkansas Education Association, and here to speak against the bill. We don't believe that the best answer is either all choice or no choice. We believe in choice and we also have a belief in diversity.
The Supreme Court, the US Supreme Court, did strike down that race cannot be the sole or determining factor in deciding issues of this sort generally because this bill for all the school districts that are not on the list removes race as for consideration of being any factor at all we think that the bill will tend to
re-segregate Arkansas schools, and we believe that will be detrimental to everybody. So it's with that thought in mind that we oppose the bill. Members, are there questions for Mr.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:18:56
Nagel? Okay. Seeing none, we'll go back to the audience. Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak for this bill? Is anyone in the audience wishing to speak against the bill?
Representative Steele has requested that we have the Attorney General at the end of the table. Is there someone from the Attorney General's office that we can have at the end of the table? Okay. Thank you, Senator. We're waiting on the attorney general, members. Any other questions for Senator Baker? Okay. Is everybody ready to go home?
While we're waiting on the attorney general's representative, let me remind you, members, If you have time for lunch, you may not, but if you have time for lunch, there are several things going on at 11.30 this morning. Any of our women legislators that are able to get to the rotunda, this is Women's Legislative Day, gentlemen. So as you see a woman legislator, if you will thank her for her service. You will also see former women legislators in the halls, and I ask that you do the same
for them. We're very glad to welcome back our women colleagues. also today at Capitol Hill, members, there is lunch with the Arkansas Alliance of the Boys and Girls Club that will be served between 11.30 and 1.00, so if we get a chance to run over and thank those people, but again, 11.30 also in the rotunda if we, ladies, if we can possibly get there for that recognition of women. This is Women's History Month, and we started a tradition a year ago of having Women's
legislative day on the last day of the month, the last working day, to recognize all women legislators. So that's going to be an annual tradition. So just know that's going on in our Capitol today. Members, Representative Steele, we have tried our best. The Attorney Many general representatives are evidently in other places this morning. We're back to the committee.
If there are no more questions, I'll ask you, Senator, if you'd like to close
Speaker 151
1:21:33
for your bill. The worst thing we could do is nothing, because the last thing I want
Speaker 153
1:21:38
to do is resegregate our schools. And it has been clearly articulated that for us to vote and do nothing, that one option that may occur relating to the Supreme Court. We hope not, but one of the options is that they will rule in such a way relating to our current law that the result could be resegregation.
And I know none of us wants that. And I know none of us wants to literally ask the federal court to come in here and deal with our schools. So you've been very gracious to me today. I appreciate the committee and the hard work you all have done this session. and I have
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:22:17
closed for my bill. Thank you. Senator Baker has closed for his bill. Members, what is your pleasure? Representative English has moved due pass. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, say no.
No. I believe it failed. Your bill has failed. Thank you, Senator, for your time and for the testimony. Representative Hobbs? No copy. Okay, Representative Hobbs has moved for a roll call. Let me see another hand. Okay, I see three hands. All right, we
Speaker 25
1:22:51
are going to roll call that Mr. Hudson.
Speaker 163
1:23:03
Representative Bradford. Representative Webb. Representative Webb. Representative Pierce. Yes. Representative Pierce. Representative Hutchinson. Yes. Representative Stewart. No. Representative Brown. No. Representative Baird. Yes. Representative Summers. Representative Summers. Yes. Representative Hobbs. Yes. Representative Carnine. Yes. Representative Dale. Representative Dale. Yes. Representative Carnine. Yes.
Representative Dale. Representative Dale. Yes. Representative Dale. Yes. Representative Dale. Representative Hopper, Representative Hopper, Representative Klemmer, Representative Klemmer, Representative McLean, Representative McLean, Representative Dickinson, Representative Representative English? Yes. Representative Steele? No.
Representative Wren? Representative Wren? You want to vote, ma'am? One, two,
Speaker 25
1:24:17
three, four. You've only got six votes, ma'am. Senator, you received six votes. Your bill has
Speaker 3
1:24:24
failed. Thank you. Thank you, madam. Thank you, Senator. You have a good day. Thank you. Members, that concludes
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
1:24:35
our agenda for today, but please be on call.
We may have other bills from the Senate, and if we do, you will be notified, and I appreciate your time. Thank you. We are adjourned.
Agenda
Call to Order
SB527
HB1893
HB2050
HB2142
HB1447
HB2049
SB897
SB956
SB337
SB774
SB780
SB914
Adjournment
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Speaker 3
Speaker 10
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham Chair
Unverified
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
Speaker 25
Speaker 27
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
Speaker 17
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
Speaker 49
Speaker 50
Speaker 29
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
Speaker 78
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
Speaker 91
Speaker 92
Speaker 95
Speaker 96
Speaker 100
Speaker 101
Speaker 30
Speaker 105
Speaker 107
Speaker 115
Speaker 121
Speaker 127
Speaker 128
Speaker 136
Representative Jody Dickinson
Unverified
Speaker 142
Speaker 145
Speaker 83
Speaker 151
Speaker 67
Speaker 153
Speaker 163
Speaker 90
Speaker 175
Speaker 177
Speaker 178
Speaker 52
Speaker 189
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
Speaker 202
Speaker 203
Speaker 204
Speaker 210
Speaker 211
Speaker 209
Speaker 212
Speaker 221
Speaker 1
Speaker 223
Speaker 224
Speaker 148
Speaker 227
Speaker 119
Speaker 225
Speaker 97