House Education Committee Part 2
Video
Transcript
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
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
0:00
Macklin is a 7th grader at Gosa Middle School. She's been shadowing me today. Where are you, Macklin? She's right there, Mr. Hyde and Dr. Abernethy are hiding her. Macklin's grandfather is a former administrator in the Arcadelfia School District and used
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
0:26
welcome, Macklin. committee being a good chair i told five different representatives they could go first
and they're all here and mr hyde though one
Speaker 6
0:42
here so we're going look at house bill 2140 that's right house bill 2140 here's an amendment
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
0:50
being passed out and take that and look at that and we'll
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
1:39
Committee, I would appreciate a motion, Committee, to
adopt the amendment, so moved. We have a motion to adopt the amendment. favor say aye. Opposed? Like sign. Mr. Hyde, you may proceed.
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
2:15
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, HB 2140 has to do with the requirement
to choose the type of representation for a school district after each census. Mr. Gary Newton is a local resident and his work kind of extensively on this, and so I'd like to have him explain the process for this, if
you will allow that, Mr. Chair. That'll be fine. Introduce
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
2:43
yourself to the record, please, and you may proceed.
Gary Newton
Unverified
2:47
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Representative Hyde, members of the committee. My name is Gary Newton. I initiated this bill with layman's language as a citizen and a father with two third graders in the public school system. As it currently stands with Arkansas law and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act, any district in the state of Arkansas that is 10% more minority population has
to have zoned representation. At present, the only mechanism for determining how that respective district will be zoned is left up to the incumbent school board members, the very people whose positions are at stake.
So 2140 would give all people in zone districts the right to make the determination how they will be represented. Currently, it's akin to a city council determining if it will be mayor council, if it will be city manager, or even this legislative body coming together and deciding we don't really want to do that bicameral thing anymore. This is a way for the people to determine how they will be represented. So what it does, for those that will be becoming newly zoned,
it will give the people the right to determine that in the first school election following the census. And for those that are currently zoned, it will give the people the same right within that first election. There is a memorandum that we'd asked to be distributed that was issued by Dan Farley from the Arkansas School Board Association. It was issued to all superintendents, co-op directors, and school board members. And it outlines what must happen now after this census and how all school district zones must be redrawn
and all school board members stand for new elections. So what we're asking the committee to consider today is a basic philosophy of government. Will the people decide how they will be represented, or will incumbent school
Speaker 22
4:42
board members tell the people how they will be represented? Thanks, sir. We're handing that information out and
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
4:52
hadn't had a real chance to look at it. But, Mr. Brown, you have a question, I understand? Yes, sir,
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
4:59
I have a question, maybe just a comment.
Sir, you made a comment that the only way that the people had to decide is for the school board to decide what the zones were. I want to suggest to you that I was chairman of the Election Commission many years ago. In fact, in the year 2000. I have a school district that has under 10% minority. They had open seating elected at large. They had seven board members. Actually, they had six because it was a consolidation of three schools into one.
So by a gentleman's agreement, they had two, two, and two. There was some people in the district that wanted to be elected by zones. they filed a petition got a majority of the people sir are you listening
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
5:55
responding no sir and so what we did was we went on and not the people had the right to say what the petitions were or what the
districts were but it was actually because it was a petition filed by the the people to zone, the election commission had the charge to zone the district, not the school
Gary Newton
Unverified
6:19
board. That's my comment to you, sir. That is in the law. Would you like me to respond to your comment? Yes, sir. This bill focuses on the new zone boundaries that are happening after the decennial census. It focuses on what boards must do from here on out. And right now, the only districts that are 10% or less minority, this does not affect in any way.
It's only those districts that are 10% more
Speaker 29
6:46
minority population which are required to have zone representation. I totally agree with
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
6:51
you. My wife has served on the local school where it went for 25 years. And every year after the census, they do have to rezone.
Gary Newton
Unverified
7:02
They have to redistribute the population. I don't understand what you're trying to do. What I'm trying to do, sir, is allow the people, every district will have to redraw their zones. Yes, sir. The people should determine whether they will be five zones, seven zones, or five zones and two at large.
Currently, only incumbent school board members determine if the people will be represented by five zones, seven zones, or five and two. So my philosophy is that the people should decide how they're governed, not incumbent school board members. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any additional questions? Seeing none, we'll go
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
7:45
to the audience. Anyone want to speak against this bill?
For this bill? Seeing none, we're back to the table, committee. Need a motion. just a second Ms.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
8:06
Glemmer I would like there was a lot of conversation going around behind me and stuff could you summarize just in a quick nutshell Representative Hyde what we're doing
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
8:16
here yes ma'am what this bill will do is require in the school board election after the census
I think that will end up being the 2012 school board election that you put on the ballot with the school board election the choice of whether or not the members of that school district wish to be represented as a five-member zone or a seven-member zone or a five-member zone with two at large. Those are the three options allowed under the law. That question already has to be made. That decision already has to be made. But as things stand currently, the school boards themselves have made that decision
and are now planning to make that decision going forward. This would simply pass it on to the voters for them to make
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
9:04
that decision. Well, would that then delay the implementation
of it because we're going to wait until 12 to vote for it? I was under the impression they were getting ready to do that as we speak.
Speaker 42
9:15
It's actually 11, and I think Mr. Newton might be able to speak to that timeline
Gary Newton
Unverified
9:20
better than myself. Ninety days before the next school election, these districts have to make that determination by resolution.
What we're saying is on that next 2011 school election that the people should make that determination so that by the next school
election in 2012, when all zones have to be redrawn and new board elections are held, that the district will then know how it's going to be represented. So it doesn't slow anything down. It simply hands that resolution off to the voters in that respective district. And the other point is it only affects the districts that are 10 percent more minority
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
9:58
population. MS. We are moving in that direction for the first time in my district, so I
Speaker 47
10:07
was just interested. Thank you. MR. Certainly. Committee, other questions?
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
10:18
Mr. Cornine, do you have a question? MR. Well, over the years, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I've been involved in the redistricting process on on let's see you I think it's four occasions now I
was always involved with larger school districts and I the thing that it made that I'm wondering about is that in those instances I'm not sure how to phrase this as a question but we had advice from folks that were certainly involved on not only a state but a national basis in other words the boards actually employed a consulting firm what I and I and I remember a lot
of the discussion and the time that they spent on trying to determine what the best possible solution would be for their particular communities because it was actually done in in three different communities it and what I'm wondering is how do we bring that to the people for them to make a choice that as I remember was again a very distinct discussion by board members trying to say you know
what what would be best for our community now I'm I'm seeing you want to make this, and I appreciate the democratic type of solution you've come up with, but how do we provide the people of the community all of the variety of options and data for them to make that decision? In fact, one district switched from a 5-2 to a 6-1 because they felt that the districts
were a lot easier to satisfy the Voting Rights Act. You say a 5-2, a 5, or what about the 6-1? And again, how do the people get the information to make a decision? That's my concern. Yes, sir,
Gary Newton
Unverified
12:28
and I think very valid concerns. The reality is the boards must hire a
demographer or work with the Secretary of State's office to redraw the zones.
That is the function of the boards. The only options available by current law are the five zones, seven zones, or five zones and two at large. There are only three options available. That's current law. The only thing this bill does is give the power to the people to decide and not those whose elected offices are at stake. If I might, and I understand that.
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
13:09
In other words, I was suggesting that tomographers also would be those that also recommended the board which solution was appropriate. Now, are you saying that the solution of a 5-2 or a 7, that, again, I'm saying how do we get that to the people? I understand all you're asking them to do is do a 5-2 or a 7. I understand that, but there was a lot of thought and a lot of, shall we say, information provided the boards to make that decision.
Now we're saying we want the people to do it, but they don't have necessarily access. I guess we could run newspaper ads, and the newspapers or others might inform the public of the options. You could have public hearings, but it looks like to me that you've created a very difficult situation for the public to make that decision. Well, the example I
Gary Newton
Unverified
14:07
would use again would be when the people determine
how they are going to be represented,
there are many sides to that question. If a city is determining if they're going to be mayor or council, there are likely people on all sides of that who are going to bring that information through a campaign to the people there will be people in favor of seven zones who will make that argument there will be people in favor of five zones who will make that argument the same with five and two so with three options on the table it's the people I recognize there are a lot of factors that go into making decisions particularly when it comes to our representative democracy
but this is one that it seems to me if we're choosing to have elected officials run our public schools, then we should treat it like a true elected body and determine how they are going to represent us,
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
15:04
not the other way around. And I certainly respect your opinion. I just think that what you might have accomplished is possibly simply clouding the issue of who's the best candidate to which is the best zone plan.
So I'm very concerned that we've added another aspect to the election process that really is unnecessary. Thank you. Representative Stewart, you had a question,
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
15:33
Mr. Chair. In my district and around the state, there are several districts, probably in the 20s, that have been merged either by annexation or consolidation, and the size of their school board was set up by an agreement with approval by the State Board
and by the Department of Education to accommodate the merging of two or three schools. This would change that agreement. This could potentially change that agreement that everybody came to a consensus on that would be best for that district on the size of
Gary Newton
Unverified
16:07
the school board. If it is 10% or more minority population, otherwise it doesn't affect it.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
16:13
Yes, and I've got one of those right now. They consolidated this past year. They went through a very contentious trial to get the two schools together
and finally came up with a 4-3 board representation from the two schools. And now we could go right away and vote to change that agreement that was reached by the two schools, the entire population of those schools, ADE and the school board. Couldn't that
Speaker 63
16:43
happen? How are you currently zoned? Is it seven zones? Seven zones. Seven zones. Under this proposal, the people would make that determination, not those that are –
it would be left up to the people to determine how they're going to
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
17:01
be represented. I understand that. Okay. But I'm saying it would change the agreement that was reached by all parties to
Speaker 66
17:07
include the State Board and the ADE. Only if the people determined
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
17:11
that it should be represented otherwise. Okay. And also another question I had that just kind of came to me. It looks like that this could disenfranchise a minority population. You're doing this because you've got a minority population, but if you vote by the majority to do this, then the majority is going to rule how they do this to the board size.
Speaker 63
17:34
Yes. Explain to me how it's disenfranchising a minority population. Well, the will
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
17:40
of the majority would be followed, and the minority could be overlooked. I mean,
Speaker 65
17:44
they would not be able to control the election. Well, the reason
Speaker 63
17:50
that the options are presented to the boards are because they're compliant with Arkansas
Gary Newton
Unverified
17:56
law and in compliance with the Voting Rights Act. All three options are considered in compliance. So I don't see how any options could be disenfranchising
when Arkansas law currently gives the boards the very power to do that.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
18:11
All right. I think we just
Speaker 4
18:16
got a disagreement there. Thank you. Any additional questions?
Speaker 68
18:23
Representative Pierce. Thank you, Mr. Chair. What
Representative Bobby J. Pierce
Unverified
18:25
you're trying to do here, we consolidated with three school districts, and we made the agreement like Representative Stewart was saying, But it ended up hurting my three school districts that consolidated with us
because after the agreement ran out, those three school districts are out there now with no people representing them, and all it turned into to the big town elected all the school board members, and my three school districts are left out that were consolidated. They don't have any members on the school board. So this, to me, would answer the question they had of why we didn't get to keep what we had. because we told them we would, but it ran out, and they were just throwing in an election at large.
And now the one big town in our district is electing all the school board members. And the little three towns that we took in, they don't have anybody on the school board. So, you know, I think it's got some problems, but I think it's also good for some different areas and different schools. You can't, you know, to me it's, to me, I always said when I was on the board for so long that those three school districts need to have some say in what's going on in their school. But their schools were taken and gone and dissolved. But the people out there still think that's their community, and it is.
So anyway, that's all. Do you agree
Gary Newton
Unverified
19:48
of course, and then the thing about it, no matter what happens with this bill, those zones will be redrawn to
Speaker 73
19:55
correctly reflect the representation of the entire school district. Do you have any
Speaker 5
20:03
other questions, Ms. Clemmer? Oh, sorry.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
20:11
Gosh, it's been a long day.
Punching away. The demographer is going to
Gary Newton
Unverified
20:18
draw the zones. It's on the back page of your handout from the Arkansas
School Board Association. It has information from the Arkansas Geographic Information Office, and it describes it with within this, the options. You can hire a demographer or you can work through the Secretary of State's office. There are different options available, but that, again, has nothing to do with this. MS. Okay.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
20:44
But my question is, those zones will be established before the voters go? MR. No.
Gary Newton
Unverified
20:48
At first, the voters have to decide how they will be represented. MS. Okay. MR. And then if it's, for instance, if it's five zones or seven zones, then they'll have to draw the, and it's within Voting Rights Act, they have to draw the zones based on numbers of registered voters, not just people, numbers of registered voters, in order to
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
21:07
keep it fair. But the school board, I mean, that's done independently of the school
Gary Newton
Unverified
21:11
board? The school board hires it, or contracts for it to be done.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
21:16
Are we going to be allowing school, I mean, that may not be, this bill may not be changing that, but are school boards
Speaker 63
21:23
going to be drawing their own districts? Not the boards themselves. They have to hire demographers or work for
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
21:30
the Secretary of State's office. Okay. They do it. All right. But they're going to be asked to approve. Who approved?
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
21:37
Does an independent body approve redistricting? Yes. They're going to contract school board contracts to have that demographic work done and to do what Richard Wilson, I guess is appropriate, does for us in getting that program out once the census has been taken
and then once the people would take it in this case, if this bill passes, the people would decide whether they're going to have a five and two or a five or a seven, the only three choices available to them. then the demographers would take that number of zones and they would shape that in the school district to make sure that it's fair and proper representation. Otherwise, they would, you know, which is why it doesn't create, I think, a problem for minority populations because if those zones aren't drawn to maintain the integrity of the minorities
to have, you know, proper representation on the Board of Education, then they would face a lawsuit and they would lose. Okay.
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
22:34
Thank you. I apologize for the questions, but we just got this, so
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
22:39
thank you. I understand. Thank you. Sorry
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
22:41
for that. Committee, any other questions? Seeing none, we'll go to the audience. Anyone want to speak against this bill? Mr. Walker, I think you may end the table there if you want to. Mr. Hyde, you all
Speaker 81
23:05
may want to slide out of the way. let mr. Walker sit there identify yourself
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
23:15
the record please my name is
John Walker and I'm a member of this House of Representatives and I'm also a resident of Little Rock. I speak in opposition to this bill. Let me give you a little history. There has not been a change in the single-member electoral system with respect to Little Rock directors in scores of years.
That is to say that you have had single member districts. I have a bill that I'll be proposing to reinforce that and to make sure that it is statewide. The United States Constitution seeks to implement the concept of one man, one vote, so it's really one man or woman, one vote. And one way you do that is by making sure that each vote, potential vote, has the same weight. The Voting Rights Act was enacted in 1964 to implement the one-man, one-vote concept
and also to make sure that non-discrimination was the law of the land. As a consequence of that, this legislature, after much litigation had been initiated largely by me, decided that in its wisdom it would eliminate the legality conflict and it would require that all school districts that had 10% minority memberships or more
would be elected by single-member districts. I'm not sure of the year when that was done, but I think it was six to eight years ago. And the background of that is this. We had won a number of cases requiring a number of school districts to change from at-large elections to single-member districts. And under the Voting Rights Act, the prevailing party is entitled to legal fees.
And those legal fees were becoming sort of automatic. so rather than pay me a lot of money after we won about 30 of these cases the legislature decided that it would go ahead and change the way things were done now where we are is that this bill seeks to undo that and put us back into a situation where communities may make a decision that they can go back to where we sued from now it does not make good sense
to do that This body is chosen on a one-person, one-vote basis. We don't have multi-member election districts for House members or for Senate members. That also has been the subject of litigation and the state lost. So we should not have to continually try to rebuild the wheel and go through the same expected outcomes in order to accommodate some people who may be dissident.
In this situation, this is really a Little Rock bill, even though it's cast in different terms. It's a Little Rock bill in this sense. The last two elections, Little Rock is now a majority city, even though some people here don't want to recognize it. And the majority of the Little Rock school board is four persons black and three persons white. And the majority is reflected. And the gentleman here, who is on the Chamber of Commerce, he wants to make sure that the
people in West Little Rock have another school, and the only way they can get it is by having majority vote. Now I ask that you all not get into something that's local, but that also you look at things that are systematic, simply because the population shift should not be the basis for changing the way people are elected. You don't change the rules simply to get the outcome you want. You change the rules in order to get justice and fairness. And in this situation, the proposal is not one that's either just or fair.
It is one that will get the state back into litigation. You all have been trying to get out of that for years, and you're still there. And unwise legislation proposed by Senator Hyde here, and I think he's doing it because of his constituents, is not something that will be beneficial. It is not supported by logic. Mr. Cornyn, who's on your committee and I, fought for years, but we fought within the context of there being a legislative framework for electing people.
And when that is undertaken and the law is established, then you abide by the law. He was a superintendent of the Little Rock School District until 2001, if I'm not mistaken, or 2002. Now, this should not be local, and I'm asking that you all do not support or approve this bill. It has far greater ramifications than one would imagine. And the other thing is that it's undemocratic.
The concept of democracy requires that you have local people. This is a Republican tenet, that local people have local control. And the least local unit is the one that we seek to implement. You try to have as many people involved in government as possible. You want it to be as representative as possible. But you want to have the opportunity for inclusivity as much as possible. and you don't want to have enclaves of people who can pull their weight together to overwhelm the majority simply because they have greater economic resources.
Speaker 90
29:19
Please vote against this bill. Any other? Mr. Steele? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question for the sponsor. Okay. Mr. Hyde, I think we're back to you anyway.
Speaker 94
29:42
Back to you. Representative Hyde, I just want you to address some of the concerns that Representative Walker mentioned as regards to this having a specific impact on the Little Rock School Board.
I'm going to give you an opportunity
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
29:56
to address that. Well, thank you, Representative. This doesn't, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't have anything to do with the Little Rock School Board in as much, in any more degree than it does every school board across the state that has a 10% or greater minority population. As a matter of fact, I'm not even sure that this would apply to Little Rock School District now because, and let me go on the record, and I do appreciate being called senator, by the way, but Little Rock is not my constituency.
I have North Little Rock and Sherwood and visited with my school board before I went to work on this bill. Little Rock, I believe, is minority-majority now. So I'm not sure that this bill would even apply to Little Rock, and I really didn't even contemplate the question. It is a fundamental issue to me in allowing the
people. I'm sorry? You speak of the school board? Yes, sir. Okay. It's a fundamental
issue to me that I believe the people should have the opportunity once every two years.
If we decide not to do this today and, you know, it doesn't get out of here in the House and so on and so forth, then you won't have an option to think about this again for ten years. It only occurs after the census each ten years. And I, for one, think that it's a good idea to allow the people to decide if they like having five zones with two at large or simply five zones or seven zones, you know, one of whichever the three options allowed by state law they presently enjoy. And it's only after that.
You know, this bill doesn't do anything to determine what the makeup of those zones would be. That would be the Secretary of State or the demographers, whoever the school board decided to retain, to help determine those zones after this vote and after the census. So I don't think that this causes any kind of lawsuit problems and doesn't put anyone at a disadvantage. It allows the people of that district the opportunity to take a vote and to be heard on how they want to be represented.
Who pays for that election? It's a school election. It's a school election. So it would be done at the same time. Right, right. It would be the 20, I said 2012 earlier, I was wrong. It would
Speaker 42
32:23
be the 2011 election is when you would put that out. I saw my questions at this time. Thanks,
Representative Toni Bradford
Unverified
32:38
sir. Mr. Bradford, do you have a motion? Yes, Mr. Chair. Since there are so many questions about this particular bill, I was wondering if possibly
Speaker 105
32:45
we could consider an interim study, so I make a motion to refer this to an interim
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
32:51
study. Proper motion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? I think the ayes have it. Mr. Chairman, I
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
32:58
sure appreciate you all giving me the time to be heard on this issue. Thank you,
Speaker 5
33:09
Mr. Vice. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Allen. Did you and Mr. Ingram, I did it again.
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
33:14
I promised too many people the same thing, but Mr. Allen assures me this is non-controversial.
He's got two and a half minutes to present this bill, and then
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
33:26
we'll go to Mr. Ingram. Thank you, Mr. Chair and
Speaker 56
33:30
members. We do have an amendment to this bill at the request of the Department of Education. House Bill 2088.
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
33:56
a motion to have a motion to adopt this amendment.
All in favor say aye. Opposed? The ayes
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
34:06
have it. Mr. Allen, you may proceed. Okay. Thank you. What this bill simply does, it requires those that provide supplemental services providers to the school district to become more accountable. As you know, supplemental services are academic and tutoring services offered during all school hours to increase academic and achievement of economically disadvantaged students, particularly
in the area of reading and writing and math. and tutoring services are paid for by the district and is free of charge to the parents participating. Under the federal law, no child left behind, certain Title I school improvement schools must offer SES to eligible students. Now, one of the things that I wanted to make sure was that when those providers sign contracts, We want some transparency, and we want those providers to be accountable for the money and the services that they are providing for the school district.
Beyond that, that's all this bill does, and I'll be willing to accept any questions. I talked to Dr. Kimbrough about it. Dr. Kimbrough is on board. This amendment is because Dr. Kimbrough wanted this amendment, and I agreed to this
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
35:32
amendment. Ms. English, I'll sew your hand. You're recognized.
Representative Jane English
Unverified
35:37
MS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Does this only provide tutoring services and remediation assistance for children who are on the free lunch program, or is it for all students? Supplemental services
Speaker 126
35:53
in this case are tied back to No Child Left Behind and funds that are provided through the federal government to support students in failing schools. So as they move up the ladder of school improvement, they have to set aside so many dollars of the Title I money to provide supplemental educational services that parents get to choose who they want to provide that.
So in an urban area such as this, there's several providers. In some of our rural areas, it's sometimes difficult to get one and two providers. What we've run into is there's no accountability for the providers themselves. And what we've got in this bill is the effort to try to make those supplemental service providers a little more accountable for the work that they're doing. And the mimit was instead of putting this on the already huge report card,
we're asking that the providers deal with this and make that information available to the parents. So I like this.
Representative Jane English
Unverified
36:56
But it goes to my other, still my question, is it only a certain group of any child? It's any
Speaker 128
37:02
students in those schools that are failing. Okay. All right.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
37:13
you. Reverend Roebuck. Thank you. I assume, Representative Allen, that you also have taken care of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act concerns that we might have with any data collection.
And I see Dr. Kimbrell nodding his head, so that's taken care of. The next question has to do with a report that was issued in August of 2009 by UALR that I've read about the providers. Dr. Kimbrell, you have that report, I assume? Yes, ma'am. I've seen the report. Okay, and how does that report fit with what Representative Allen's trying to do in
Speaker 126
37:45
this bill? Well, I think what it does is it points out the things that that particular study said needed to happen, that there needed to be greater accountability on the service provider's perspective.
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
37:55
Great, so this is long overdue. And then my last question has to do with, I believe you talk about parental satisfaction. What's the term you use? The survey satisfaction. Survey satisfaction. Is that required of our providers currently to do that? No, ma'am. Not that I'm
Speaker 126
38:12
– I think many of them do it, but I'd be incorrect, and I can't answer that, Madam Chair. I'm not sure if it's required or not, now that I think about it. So, in
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
38:24
other words, with this bill, if it becomes law, would they be required to do that, sir?
Speaker 126
38:29
Yes, that's what this one would require, that they do a survey of the parents of the students that they're serving. These parents are making these choices. Sometimes it's the only choice they
Speaker 130
38:39
have, unfortunately. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Speaker 138
38:42
Representative Steele. A motion at the proper time, Mr. Chairman.
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
38:49
Anyone of y'all just want to speak against or for this bill? Seeing none,
Speaker 5
38:56
we'll come back to the committee. Mr. Steele, you have a motion? Do pass.
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
39:00
Do pass as amended, Mr. Steele. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? I believe the ayes have it. Representative Allen, you pass. your bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I apologize for getting you out of order yesterday or other day. And anyway. Well,
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
39:14
you're back in grace. I told Representative Ingram I would only take four minutes. I took four and a half. I may be back in grace as one of you. I'm
Speaker 113
39:21
not sure about two of you. I don't know about that four and a half minute clock here you got. Committee, we're going to look at 1901.
Speaker 143
39:34
Representative Ingram. He looks like he's got a little A
Speaker 91
39:38
lot of help to end the table there. MR. Representative Ingram needs a lot of help to
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
39:43
end the table. I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate committee members. Also Scott Richardson from the Attorney General's Office, if he would join us up here for questions. House Bill 1901 is basically the funding that we have been operating under since the Lake View decision. It has a 2 percent foundation increase and 2 percent categorical. I would be happy to I would be happy to deferred let these
learning gentleman answering questions you might have he wants to proceed first if I think if you have any questions up will
Speaker 5
40:26
be happy to answer committee you have any questions on this Mr.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
40:33
Stewart. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I've sat in on the several meetings over the last two years on adequacy of transportation funding,
and we've determined that a lot of schools are getting too much money for transportation. Some of them are not getting enough. Does this bill make any allowance for those discrepancies in the amount of funding to the amount of need? this is the same bill
Speaker 149
40:58
as we've had in the past since the Lakeview decision
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
41:01
it's the same adequacy bill with 2% in foundation 2% categorical but no change in transportation right so it does not address
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
41:12
the people who have the high cost transportation areas like in my district I have
seven schools all of them are rural areas and they are saying they're spending more money than
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
41:22
they're getting and it does not address that you're correct and neither does it address of communities that have teachers that their salary is higher than the
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
41:31
state average either. But you're right. Yes, sir. Right. But this is only a transportation funding
Speaker 126
41:39
bill, though. No, sir. This is the adequacy funding bill to fund the foundation funding stream for schools in the
next biennium. Which includes the transportation. Yes, sir. Transportation is in the matrix, and this would add 2 percent to the current matrix which has transportation in it. It would actually apply 2 percent to every facet in the
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
42:06
current matrix. All right. Thank you. Mr. Ingham, I know there's another bill in the Senate that's similar to this. It's a little difference. It has to do with, like Mr. Stewart said, the funding to hold those schools harmless
that are not using all their transportation money, as it's been calculated. Let me go back a minute. Mr. Kimball, adequacy, who determines that?
Speaker 132
42:30
From what I understand, sir, adequacy is determined by the legislative branch of the government. Okay, and that's done by the committee that meets during the
Speaker 126
42:41
interim? Well, I think that recommendation comes from that committee, and then it is either supported or changed by this body, including both the House and the Senate, from my understanding.
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
42:52
Good. I guess what I'm trying to get at, if we pass this bill out and another bill comes down from the Senate that has almost the same title, adequacy, but it has a little different funding, the way the funding is handled, I wonder what we're going to get into
down the line, Mr. Ingram. I think about that every
Speaker 91
43:11
day, about so many different things out here in the legislature, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Mr. Dale, you have a question.
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
43:27
Representative Ingram, does this bill present the adequacy as was voted by the Senate House Committee recommended? Is it changing that recommendation some? No, sir. It's the very same recommendation that came out of the Joint House and Senate Education Committee.
Speaker 149
43:58
I'm going to let Mr. Woods respond to that.
Speaker 164
44:03
We may want to. I assume you're referencing where the Education Committee recommended a 2%
Speaker 166
44:08
to 2.4% cost of living increase. They also referenced in a later paragraph that the committee also is recommending creating a separate funding line-on-item to be known as enhanced transportation funding. Is that in this
Speaker 167
44:24
one? No, sir. This one is strictly 2 percent increase in foundation aid and categorical.
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
44:31
and they in that what percent did the joint recommendation have a range of two percent to two point
Speaker 168
44:44
four okay thank you very much Okay, I'm sorry.
Speaker 95
45:02
Rep. Steele. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kimbrough, could you explain to me, or Mr. Ingram, alternative learning environment? I've just heard multiple definitions for
Speaker 132
45:14
that. Yes, sir. As defined now, I think in our rules defines, and
Speaker 126
45:19
there is a House, excuse me, a Senate bill that's coming through the system that will more clearly define alternative learning environment, but it is actually a school within school, usually can be a school within school, can be a separate actual charter school, but it is an environment that is created for students who are having difficulties in the traditional learning environment.
It could be smaller class settings. It could be more in-depth type of learning, but it's set up for students who are struggling in the traditional classrooms.
Speaker 95
45:49
So is that funding more? I see the $4,000. Yes, sir. Is that on top of the $6,000? Yes, sir. That's on top of the $6,000. So those
Speaker 126
45:59
students get $10,000 plus? Yes, sir. A student who actually resides in an ALE or is educated in an ALE for, I think it says 20 consecutive days, or we're working on that 20 consecutive days. So they're enrolled in the school district, and they're in an ALE.
They get the $6,000 this year, $23,000 plus the $4,000 plus. So each of those students are worth about $10,000. And that goes up through high
Speaker 7
46:25
school? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. It goes from, if they are
Speaker 94
46:28
elementary ones, it goes all the way through. Has there ever been any consideration, I'm talking fast because I know it's a short period of time, any consideration to giving students who focus on a more technical aspect of education in the later years under the definition of alternative learning environment?
Speaker 126
46:42
That's not anything that we've looked at yet
because many of those alternative learning environments are set up in such a way. There are some that are actually set up to fast-track into GEDs and then into a technical school. So they're not part of the technical school system, but there has recently been a little conversation about trying to do that. And Representative Ingram, is
Speaker 95
47:04
this the bill that the governor supports? Yes, it is, Representative Steele. Thank you,
Speaker 171
47:12
Mr. Chairman. Committee, any other? Representative Steele.
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
47:15
Yes, I'll do some quick reading here, and I think I came across the answer to
Representative Dale's question. On page 2, line 14, it talks about what the interim study did recommend, and it recommended that we remove a portion of the transportation funding to determine necessary funding levels. Then down in paragraph four, it talks about that if we adopt this bill,
then the General Assembly will decline to adopt the enhanced transportation funding approach recommended in the 2010 interim study. So we met as interim study for two years, studied all the aspects of this, came up with a recommendation, and then we're not
Speaker 178
48:08
going to adopt it. Chippardize this language
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
48:16
right here. My question is, the Adequacy Committee is tasked with determining what is adequate.
The Adequacy Committee came up with a determination. This is adequate. It better addresses the need than what we are currently doing, but this bill would stay with what we are currently doing and not take into consideration the recommendation of the Adequacy Committee. Is that the way I understand this? Well,
Speaker 164
48:44
in that same language beginning on line 24 on page 2, it goes forward to say, and certainly
Speaker 166
48:49
the Attorney General's office can speak to this since they were part of drafting this language,
But it's felt that this approach jeopardizes the method for determining and meeting school district adequacy needs, a method that the Supreme Court found to be constitutional in 2004 and 2007. According to the General Assembly, it finds and determines that the foundation funding formula and its resource matrix on which it is built should be maintained
Speaker 179
49:11
and declines to adopt the enhanced transportation funding approach recommended in the 210 interim study. well I
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
49:23
understand that but having said in all those meetings
I also realized that going back to the PACA study even
then they said you need to set up a mechanism to study some of these things especially transportation and that's kind of what we did and yet we're still not following our own recommendation and that accuracy committee that was what the tool was. I mean, they kept saying you've got to do an adequacy study
to determine what's adequate, and then when we determine it, we're not going to abide by it.
Speaker 181
50:01
I'll let Scott Richardson from the AG's office weigh in on
Speaker 183
50:08
this matter. Yes, Scott, you're recognized. If I may, Representative Stewart is generally correct. I mean, the adequacy study is done by the interim committees, and that's a recommendation to the full body of the General Assembly, and the General Assembly must look at that recommendation and decide for itself what needs to be done to maintain adequacy in educational funding. I think part of the issue here is you have a recommendation for a cost of living increase
for adequacy funding of 2 to 2.4 percent, and then you have a recommendation to take away a little bit from that to fund something that the Interim Committee found was beyond adequacy, enhanced transportation that was not required for adequacy purposes. So you have a little bit of an internal conflict in the recommendations of the Interim Committee, and this bill would help resolve that conflict. Now, if the General Assembly decided that enhanced transportation needed to be funded
and need to be taken care of, so in an enhanced manner you could certainly do that. But it makes, it becomes constitutionally problematic when we're taking an adequacy recommendation of a 2% increase and then we take away from that to fund non-adequacy programs, if you follow me. But did not the report make that exception
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
51:38
when it made the recommendation for the 2 to 2.4, except for transportation?
Speaker 188
51:45
Well, as I think you noted in your earlier
Speaker 183
51:53
comments, you know, so far we don't mandate the matrix, and that is a system that's served us well in allowing districts flexibility in using that funding to address the individual needs of the districts. this enhanced funding that gets taken out of the adequacy recommendation leaves some districts without the full 2% increase,
whereas a few districts would then get more than the 2% increase for enhanced transportation funding. And that's where we get into a little bit of a constitutional problem when we have an adequacy recommendation, but then we're not going to use that recommendation to fund adequacy. We're going to use part of that to fund things that are not required for adequacy, that the interim committee found was not required for adequacy. So transportation is
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
52:45
not considered part of the adequacy formula then?
Speaker 183
52:48
Well, the interim committees and the General Assembly in the 2009 session adopted a definition of transportation as what's required for adequacy, and that was – And let me get the language so I'll make sure I get it right. That some amount of transportation is necessary for adequacy to the extent that a student would not otherwise be able to realize the opportunity for an adequate education but for such transportation being provided by the state.
So the finding in 2009 was, by the full General Assembly, was that some portion of transportation is required for adequacy, but it doesn't require that every student receive a ride to school, but that some portion below that is required for adequacy. And that's in the – I'm looking at the 2008 adequacy report. Okay. So if I understand
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
53:51
you, then, that some extent of transportation is out there.
And what the interim study said was that, well, we have schools that are getting more transportation funding than they need now, so they're definitely adequate. And so but we have some that aren't getting enough that are not adequate. We're going to address that. And by not giving the schools that don't need it money, we can give more to the ones that need it to meet their adequacy question. and we're still providing transportation to some extent to all the schools.
Speaker 188
54:27
Wouldn't you agree? Well, the matrix, though, is not – I mean, the matrix
Speaker 183
54:36
is the matrix. It's set up to fund a prototypical school. It's not set up to fund every school. So the idea behind the matrix and part of what the Supreme Court held was constitutional was flexibility in how matrix funds are used. so that, you know, we have this funding system for 240-some different school districts, so they each are going to have different individual needs.
Some are going to have higher transportation costs. Some are going to have higher personnel costs. Some are going to have higher special aid costs. I don't know. Y'all are educators, so you probably know better than I would. But the idea behind the matrix is to give them flexibility. And the recommendation from the committee was a 2 percent increase, But under the alternative proposal, it would not be a full 2 percent increase. What I'm
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
55:25
looking at and what I'm hearing from my superintendents is that
the cost right now of providing special aid or something has not changed,
but the price of fuel has changed. The cost of their transportation is going up, and it is a concern to them, and the ones that have these 40-, 50-mile bus routes are hurting. And if we don't do something, we are preventing them from possibly providing an adequate education because they're going to have to be taking money from special ed and all these other places to buy that diesel and run these bus routes. So that's where I'm coming from, from protecting my rural schools that have.
And I drove a bus for 12 years. I know exactly
Speaker 182
56:11
what we're talking about. I understand. Thank you. Committee,
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
56:24
to the audience. Anyone want to speak against this bill? I think we have a couple signed up to speak against the bill. Mr. Abernathy, Ron Harder beat you the punch.
But then you can have your turn in a minute. Mr.
Harder. I understand Mr. Pierce you want to stop this thing and you make a
Speaker 5
56:53
motion to stop it and pick it up committee have a motion
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
57:03
on the floor to adjourn all right that's not a debatable motion so all
All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Do the ayes have it? Committee before you take off, though, let me say this. Anybody on joint budget? Are you all meeting Thursday? What time? There's three of you on joint budget? One, two, three, four. I'm thinking about coming in at 9 o'clock Thursday morning. Can we not do that? Four of you gone?
Speaker 199
57:38
Mr. Chamberlain, what about 9.30? Okay, well, Ms.
Representative Tim Summers
Unverified
57:56
Summers, do you have a comment? Is there any possibility just returning and voting on this only after our session? We've already had our testimony
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
58:08
State agencies are set up to meet upon adjournment If not That's what's set up right
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
58:19
committee cannot meet while joint budget is meeting So I guess we'll come in at 10 Thursday morning But we're going to work through lunch We'll have lunch brought in And we'll do that Meeting adjourned
Agenda
Call to Order
HB2140
HB2088
HB1901
Adjournment
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative Johnnie J. Roebuck
Unverified
Speaker 2
Representative Eddie L. Cheatham
Unverified
Speaker 5
Speaker 6
Representative Barry Hyde
Unverified
Gary Newton
Unverified
Speaker 22
Representative Jerry R. Brown
Unverified
Speaker 27
Speaker 29
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
Speaker 42
Speaker 47
Representative Les "Skip" Carnine
Unverified
Speaker 58
Representative Randy Stewart
Unverified
Speaker 63
Speaker 66
Speaker 65
Speaker 4
Speaker 68
Representative Bobby J. Pierce
Unverified
Speaker 73
Speaker 81
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
Speaker 90
Speaker 94
Representative Toni Bradford
Unverified
Speaker 105
Representative Fred Allen
Unverified
Speaker 56
Speaker 119
Representative Jane English
Unverified
Speaker 126
Speaker 128
Speaker 124
Speaker 130
Speaker 138
Speaker 113
Speaker 143
Speaker 91
Representative Keith M. Ingram
Unverified
Speaker 149
Speaker 132
Representative Robert E. Dale
Unverified
Speaker 164
Speaker 166
Speaker 167
Speaker 168
Speaker 95
Speaker 7
Speaker 171
Speaker 178
Speaker 179
Speaker 180
Speaker 181
Speaker 183
Speaker 188
Speaker 182
Speaker 199
Representative Tim Summers
Unverified
Speaker 203