Education Committee- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (7)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1113
Act 350
· 4 mentions in agenda, transcript, chapter
Matched: “…NCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXCESS FOOD IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. HB1113 Dotson TO AMEND THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS URBAN HOMES…”
|
TO AMEND THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS URBAN HOMESTEAD ACT TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF … | Dotson | Notification that HB1113 is now Act 350 |
|
HB1009
Act 141
· 3 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “HB1009 Wardlaw TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXC…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXCESS FOOD IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. | Wardlaw | Notification that HB1009 is now Act 141 |
|
HB1103
Act 126
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1103 Evans TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING A…”
|
TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMIC FACILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION. | Evans | Notification that HB1103 is now Act 126 |
|
HB1104
Act 85
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1104 Evans TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING S…”
|
TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING SPECIAL SCHOOL ELECTIONS. | Evans | Notification that HB1104 is now Act 85 |
|
HB1151
Act 89
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…S OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING SPECIAL SCHOOL ELECTIONS. HB1151 Evans TO SUSPEND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL RATING SYSTEM FOR THE 20…”
|
TO SUSPEND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL RATING SYSTEM FOR THE 2020-2021 SCHOOL YEAR UNDER § 6-15-2105. | Evans | Notification that HB1151 is now Act 89 |
|
SB115
Act 19
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…BEING UTILIZED AS A HOMESTEAD; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SB115 A. Clark TO SUBSTITUTE "ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY THREE RIV…”
|
TO SUBSTITUTE "ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY THREE RIVERS" FOR "COLLEGE OF THE OUACHITAS" IN THE ARKANSAS … | A. Clark | Notification that SB115 is now Act 19 |
|
SB116
Act 18
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…IVERS" FOR "COLLEGE OF THE OUACHITAS" IN THE ARKANSAS CODE. SB116 A. Clark TO AMEND THE NAME OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ARKA…”
|
TO AMEND THE NAME OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY; TO ABOLISH … | A. Clark | Notification that SB116 is now Act 18 |
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 7, 2026
I'd like to call this meeting to order. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here today. It's
Speaker 2
0:07
a beautiful day before the cold sets back in
again. Let's see. I'm looking at notes I have up here. Who's here to speak against Bill? So first on the list is Representative Wardlaw. You may take the end of the table and present HB1009, and you're recognized.
Representative Jeff Wardlaw
Unverified
0:40
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm a little nervous. It's the first time in 10 years I've ever been in this committee. We'll treat you as bad as you can. Yeah, I figured. Really simple bill. um a lot of my schools have came to me over the tenure of being here and they've said they've always wanted a mechanism to be able to give away leftover food this year it came extremely important through the pandemic with so many people not having jobs and not having means um Ford iSchool system came to me and they said look we're having to throw away all the school
this food because it's against the law so we had this simple little bill drafted now they can do uh with the food um whatever they want to do with it and hopefully they'll be giving that to hungry kids and that way we're not sending any kids home for the night hungry and with that i'll be glad to take any questions i represent vault you have a
question yes sir you're recognized well kind of
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:37
a question i want to say thank you for bringing this bill this is a big deal in my
area also where schools are throwing away food that could actually be sent home to help our students that don't get meals until the next day whenever they get back to school. So I appreciate the bill. And with that, I have a motion at a proper time. You have a question? Representative Meek, you're
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:03
right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative, you may not know this, but didn't like last year or year before, session before we passed something similar, I think Representative Dotson carried it.
Do you know what I'm referring to and how is this different from what he had
Representative Jeff Wardlaw
Unverified
2:18
already done? Yes, sir. According to the Bureau, when I talked to him, there were some restrictions still
Speaker 21
2:23
there. Okay. I don't know if they were intended. This lifts those restrictions and totally leaves it up to the school
Speaker 22
2:30
district. All right. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any other questions? Representative Deffenbaugh. Thank
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
2:38
you, Mr. Chair. I like this bill. I just wondered, do you know who, you got any idea who would have oversight over that?
I'm guessing the Department of Ed. Yeah. Well, like local school districts, you think the head
Representative Jeff Wardlaw
Unverified
2:57
of the. . . Oh, I'm guessing food
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
2:59
service management. Yeah, yeah. Yes, sir. Okay, okay. Yeah. Okay,
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
3:05
thanks. Representative Murdoch, you recognize. Welcome to the committee, my friend. I guess, again, this is a good bill. It's a dangerous place. It's a good bill. A question along the lines of, is there any guy, so you're saying that the ADE will promulgate the rules for this
in terms of how old the food can be, it still can be distributed to the public, or are you letting just the district make those quality control decisions, if you will? I'm guessing the department will do that. Okay, so they'll make
Speaker 32
3:32
some rules with this. Okay, thanks. Any other questions? Reps involved. Reps in Wardlaw, are you closed for your... I am
closed, Mr. Chairman. What's the will of the committee?
All in favor? Is there any discussion on the motion?
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, no? Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I believe you passed. Don't expect that every time. It'll be another 10 years before I come back. Don't be a strength. HB 1113, Representative
Dotson, you're recognized to take the end of the table if you're, are you here? Yes, I have an amendment on it. Oh, yes, we do have an amendment on that bill.
We're going to pass out that amendment. We will look at that amendment first. I do have some testimony on that also. I don't know if they're on the, probably for the bill, not the amendment, I would take it.
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
4:56
Correct, Mr. Chair. I think it's on the bill,
not the amendment. Let's get this
handed out, and I'll let you explain your amendment. Thank you.
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
5:11
All righty. I believe you can start on that. You recognize Representative Dotson? Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment is a pretty simple one that the Department of Environment Quality asked to be added and included in this. Since we're discussing land, basically donated land, as I understand it, if a donated land is, there are some restrictions on that particular piece of land for environmental purposes.
Generally this is for, if a donated land is for building a church or something like that, they want to make sure that the building can't go over whatever the area is that's restricted use. only like a parking lot or something could be built on that section of the land, this would include that in this particular bill so that since this is related to schools and building of schools, they want to make sure that that restricted use continues on that piece of property once it's donated for that purpose. So that's what the amendment does, and then I'll
get into the bill further.
Are there any questions on the amendment? I have a motion to adopt the amendment. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in
favor say aye. Any opposed? No. Your amendment has been
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
6:29
adopted. You are recognized to present your bill as amended. Thank you, Mr. Chair. HB 1113 is as amended. Basically, the concept behind this, the Commissioner of State Lands has property that generally it acquires through delinquent taxes.
I'm not sure if all of the property in the Homestead Act was acquired that way, but these types of properties in the Homestead Act, the Commissioner of State Lands is allowed to donate them to community organizations for the purpose of low-income housing, building low-income housing. What this bill would do would expand that if there has not been housing, low-income housing, built on property that's in a community organization's charge for at least three years.
Basically, it's undeveloped land, it's not being used, and there's no intent by anyone to actually build low-income housing in that area. this bill would allow that community organization to allow someone to develop a school, either a public school or a public charter school, on that particular piece of property. So we're talking about land that's not in use, hasn't been in use, and there are no future plans that somebody's looking to develop.
It also has a section in there that it has to be in low-income areas that are below the average poverty rate in the entire state. So we're talking about areas that are a little bit more economically depressed, and a school in that area would certainly help with the development of that area and help educational quality as well. So that's the purpose, the intent behind the bill, and I'm more than happy to try to answer any questions that I can or get somebody else that might know a little bit more details.
I have other people available to testify as well if need
Chair
Unverified
8:44
to be. Representative Evans, you're recognized for a
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
8:47
question. Here, Mr. Chair. Representative Dodson, thank you for bringing this to the committee. I just wanted to clarify, I think I know the answer, but just to make sure. So there's no restrictions on who could enter into an agreement with the land commissioner on this property. So public school, if there was a vacant building within their district that meets all the guidelines that you've laid out,
the public school could work with the land commissioner to acquire that building to expand upon their current facilities. I
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
9:17
believe the answer is yes. However, I think this is completely undeveloped land, so I don't know that there would actually be any buildings already there that had been abandoned or, I mean, I guess it's possible in the future that that could happen. But to my knowledge and understanding, this is raw land that's not been developed. Great. Thank you. And, Mr. Chair,
Chair
Unverified
9:38
I have a motion at the proper time.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
9:40
Representative Meeks, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The only question I have on this is why limit it to only the high poverty areas? Why not make it more widely available for this
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
10:00
to be used by folks? Well, I think just because the Homestead Act is for low-income housing specifically, this bill is tailored specifically to remain within that charge.
Okay. That's, as I understand it
Chair
Unverified
10:17
anyway. All right. Thank you. Representative Beck,
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
10:23
you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. One question, it might be covered in here and I might have missed it, but so you use the term that nothing's been done with the land and there are no future plans to do anything
with the land, the property, excuse me. So how is that determined, that there
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
10:42
are no future plans? Well, I guess no known plans for housing development at the time that it's going to be donated for the use of a school.
So some of these things may sit there for more than three years. I've heard some of them have been there for more than a decade. Being unused, undeveloped, the Commissioner of State Lands has allowed these properties to be, I guess, donated or used by community organizations for the purpose of low-income housing, but nothing's been done with it. There's nothing in process with it. So I guess you can never know what the future are as far as future plans.
I may have overstated that. I don't know. but no known plans at the moment that they're going to move it into a donation for schools
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
11:34
just a quick follow-up um so the land commissioner would be the one that would determine that there are no plans for this property i'm just trying to make sure that we get clear on
that because you could create a problem yeah i
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
11:54
mean they obviously own the property now or at that point so this we're primarily related to um as the bill states on page two uh line six this
is referring to a donated parcel of land that is held by a community community organization so it's already been donated to the community organization i don't know that the commissioner interstate lands is, is still in control of it necessarily at the time, um, for low income housing. It just hasn't been developed for low income housing for a number of years. That was the intended purpose that it was donated to the community organization. Uh, but moving forward in the future, it expands the purpose where that, that, uh,
community organization can now build a school on it under
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
12:40
this bill. I like to intend the bill. I just worry a
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
12:47
little bit about that confusion point. okay thank you chairman uh representative dodson uh my concern becomes that this is a piece of land that's been donated to a community organization and because at this point they have not had plans means uh capacity to do anything with this property and it's detailed that this is in
poverty areas so sometimes in those areas community organizations may have property that's been given to them in various ways but at that point you know for years they may not have raised the money had an opportunity to do what they want to do with the land it could be something that was in um you know in the um some part of the um the community um tradition or whatever the case may be But my fear here is it's given to a community organization, but if they haven't done that in three years, then now they're subject to having their land taken over, being given to somebody else to go do something else.
So what it smells of, so in all transparency, it smells of, I know in my district, there's lots of property, for lack of a better word, that is subject to this type of probably situation that's sitting there. And to be honest with you, the people that own the organization don't have the means to to do anything with it. But certainly what they don't want to happen is that it's given to someone else and then something is built there.
There's not of their liking. So what this says, if I have this correct, is something that I I don't necessarily want in my community. that could be, let's say, a competition to our public school system. With this bill, you could come and build another form of delivery right in
Speaker 32
14:47
the neighborhood of my public school system or very near it and provide a new school and another avenue to,
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
14:57
I'm going to use the word segregate or divide us inside of that community and it's so can that happen what I
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
15:10
just said? Well under this bill you would
have the ability for either a public school or a public charter school to develop this land for educational purposes. So if it's in that particular low income area it's not been developed for housing like it was intended to be for a number of years this bill limits it or three years
requires it to be a minimum of three years but like i said some of this land has has been sitting idle for more than three years much more than three years and so this would allow for any public school or any public charter school so uh you know wherever that land happens to be somebody could come in to build a school there.
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
15:56
So my concern, Representative Dodson, would be that there are more checkoffs in terms of inside of the community of people buying into this happening to that community.
Because all this talks about is how some property is inside of a community owned by a community organization or given to a community organization, how it can be captured. And then somebody can just come and build something there that that community is in favor of, for lack of a better word. But certainly what I'm scared of is what I see happening in our educational situation is these type situations where schools or other forms against the public school or in competition,
That may not be the right word, but other forms of delivery are built right there in the middle of our system. And instead of all the energy going to building up a poor public school or a failing public school or a struggling public school, here's another possibility of something happening to further divide,
Speaker 32
17:05
bring down, and otherwise undergird the public school system. So my concern is that.
Your concern is noted, sir. I'm going to speak up a little bit. I usually don't talk a lot, but
I'm going to kind of follow in with Reggie. I have those same concerns. When I read the bill, that was the thing, because when you go through the impoverished areas that I have in my district or close to my district, Les Warren actually has a lot in his district over there, and sometimes it takes them a while to build funds, and I've actually been talking to some people on building a mission-type building on a lot that was donated to them. But it's taken them years to be able to come up with the funds to do that.
So I understand Reggie's frustration in this because if they have the land there and they just quite can't get the money built up, and then somebody can come in and take that away. I don't have a problem with the schools. Now, I know I'm not for taking and doing away with our public schools, but I know we're going to always have charter schools popping up in different places, and they'll either do great or they'll leave. So, but I do understand the frustration of seeing property go and go away.
Speaker 48
18:20
Mr. Chairman, if I may, if you look on the
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
18:23
bill on, this is still the page two of the unamended version. It's not been engrossed yet. So the actual bill, if you look on lines 16 and 17, it says the community organization that receives the donated parcel of land, we're talking about they've already had it in their possession for a minimum of three years, they may transfer the donated parcel of land to a recipient that shall use the donated parcel of land for the development by a public school district or an open enrollment public charter school.
So the community organization still is in control of the land. They don't have to transfer it to anybody. I mean, I don't know what the exact definition of a community organization is that the Commissioner of State Lands donates it to. I would imagine it means a local organization. So that local control aspect of that community would still be in charge of whether or not they want to release that land for development of an educational purpose before they do it.
Okay, I've got quite a few questions going on. So my other part of that, so if they own that land or they have been awarded that land and they do not want this to happen, can they hold on to it? Yes. Okay, then that's okay, then I'm okay. Yeah, if they can hold on to it without having it taken away from them, I'm good.
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
19:51
After the three years, right? Yeah, I mean, they can't release it for anything other than low-income housing until at least the first three years have passed, but then they may release it for the additional purposes.
They have to release it. No, they don't have to release it. They can hold on to it indefinitely.
No, no, I mean, but, I mean, they can't just take it away from them. They have to have it released, okay? Right, right, yeah. That's kind of what you were looking for, Reggie? If you're saying that they do not have to release it. They do not have to, yes. That's kind of where Reggie and I were both trying to
find out. I still have a bunch of questions here. Representative Speaks, you're recognized, if you're good. It's already been answered. Okay. Representative Lowry?
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
20:31
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know sometimes a lot of the concern about, you know, whether this property should be available for community organizations really is just pushback over the issue of charters, charter schools. And if I understand correctly, and this is very similar to the bill that Senator Clark and I presented several years back about unused and underutilized school buildings, it would have to be an existing charter school for them to even be able to apply
for the purchase at fair market value of this property, correct? I would
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
21:09
imagine that, yeah, you'd have to have a charter school or it would be the local school district in that
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
21:15
area. A new charter school could not just pop up and say, we want that building. They would have to already be established to be able to make any kind of a
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
21:26
claim. Yeah, I mean, it would have to be an entity
that is established. I don't know that it couldn't be a newly established charter school.
Right. I mean, it could be a newly established one without a previous charter. Follow-up, Mr. Chair?
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
21:45
And, you know, we heard the discussion about, you know, these buildings are impoverished areas and may need to be used by community organizations. But would it not be a positive thing in those communities if a school district, okay, and we'll just talk about the public school district, is able to, at a fraction of the cost of building a new building,
be able to secure one of these buildings and then renovate
it or refurb it? I don't think we're talking about
Speaker 105
22:19
building, we're talking about property. No buildings.
This is raw land. Okay, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. Um, never mind. Okay. Thank you. Uh,
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
22:28
Ripley Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. My question is related to that line you were referencing 16. Um, it two, two things. One is the community organization. You mentioned you didn't know the definition. I like this idea. I think it's a good
idea, but I am curious. It would be better if we at least had some frameworks so that, uh, communities would understand, do they qualify as a community organization? Maybe that's already defined somewhere and
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
22:52
i don't know but yeah i imagine it's defined under the homestead act the commissioner state lands before they they i mean we're talking about already existing community organizations that the commissioner state lands has donated and they hold the property okay so um like i said i don't know what the definition it's probably in another act that
the commissioner state lands may release these or donate these lands to a community organization for the purpose of low-income housing that's part of the homestead act this is those already existing community organizations now have the ability to um their their mission can be expanded to educational purposes not just low-income housing after the land set there in their possession for three years at least being dormant with no no development being done okay i understand better follow-up you recognize the other
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
23:42
question i had was about it looks like they can donate it to a
recipient, and then the recipient can use it for public education purposes on a public school or charter school, open charter school. That recipient, I'm curious about how that, because it feels like the framework is we're going to donate it to the school for school purposes. Is the school intended to be the recipient, or is there some other scenario in which a third-party recipient would receive the donated property from the community organization and then in some way develop it
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
24:14
for the school? I guess a third party could, but more than likely you're talking about the public school
district is the recipient if it's going to a public school district. If it's going to a open enrollment public charter school, then it would be whatever that entity that's going to develop the land for that charter school
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
24:41
is. I understand. Thank you. I appreciate that. Representative Meeks. Back up. Just sitting here looking over, another question came to me. So if I'm community organization XYZ and I want to participate in this, what would stop
me from being able to do it now? Why do we need the permissive
language to allow a community organization
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
25:02
to donate land for school? Because these lands are restricted use for low-income housing only right now. The commissioner of state lands under the Homestead Act can release them to a community organization strictly to build low-income housing. And we're talking where that purpose hasn't been fulfilled in a number of years. community organization still holds the land this expands the purpose ideally to help you know
bolster the the area in which a school is going to be built so we're talking about somebody either a school district or open enrollment part public charter school that would invest you know hundreds of thousands probably if not millions of dollars in in building a school building in that low income area which uh you know obviously helps build the the local economy it helps build the local i mean other lands around that that may also be held still for low income housing could
then likely be developed for housing in close proximity to that
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
26:16
it's true. Representative Vaught. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So correct me if I'm wrong, but I think charter schools have to be eligible through the Department of Ed before they could even be eligible
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
26:27
for these lands. Is that right? Likely correct. I can't speak for the Department.
Speaker 123
26:35
Do you know, Mr. Chair, if that's true? I'm
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
26:39
sorry. I didn't hear your question. I wasn't paying attention. Before a charter school would be eligible for these lands, it would have to be approved by
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
26:54
the Department of Ed? Yes. Yes, it would. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Beck. Thank you. Just a quick point. These are donated parcels, right, not sold parcels? Right. Okay. I heard some people use the word to sell a parcel,
but these parcels would be donated to
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
27:10
the school district. Yeah, under this, that they may transfer the donated parcel. So to my mind, that means they're not actually selling them. They're transferring an already donated parcel from the commissioner of state lands to the community organization. The community organization holds them. They're in control of them. Then they can transfer that donated parcel, not profit from it.
Speaker 129
27:38
Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Dodson, or maybe if we can
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
27:52
have the Land Commissioner speak to this, because I guess you all already assumed, or let me ask you this, how many parcels of land are
there that have this exemption on them right now? Oh, goodness. I wouldn't know.
Do we have anybody from the land
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
28:18
commissioner's office? I don't think it really... Because, I mean, from what you're saying, this is an exemption that already exists, so we should know approximately how many parcels of land would have this exemption that's eligible, that is subject to this. And I'm curious about how many parcels are there and where are they located?
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
28:37
Uh, I'm sure the commissioner of state lands could provide that information, but, um,
Fred, I'll tell you, they're everywhere. Yeah, they're, they're all across the state. So, I mean, but, but once the land commissioner lets go of it, it belongs to that community. He has no more authority over that land. So they're, I mean, really they're not in place in what we're talking about. It's once it's already been sent to that community is what we're talking about now. And the community does not have to release it. I just had a text from someone. They do not have to release it unless they want to release it. If they don't want
it, they're not going to do anything with it, then they can release it.
Speaker 139
29:14
But they don't have to, ever. Okay, well then, Mr. Chair, I guess I'm
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
29:25
back to the same question then. I guess if there's a deed restriction on the land, I guess this is what we're talking about, if there's an exemption on the land from preventing them to use it in the manner that this bill is trying to suggest.
I guess if there's the commission of lands discussion, I'll just save it for discussion. Thank you.
Representative Megan Godfrey
Unverified
29:56
Representative Godfrey. Excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Dodson, I just have a few clarifying questions. One was about community organizations and the definition of that, and you've explained that as defined by the Commissioner of Lands. I was wondering if you could also, to Representative Johnson's point about the recipient of the land being perhaps an individual or a third party and not a public school or a charter
school, if you could define for me educational purposes, because I think what we've talked about in the bill, it says the land can be used for educational purposes, and I think what we've talked about and understood is the building of a new school, a new school building. Are there other purposes
other than just establishing a new school, a new school building that would be permissible under
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
30:42
this bill? I don't believe so. I
think it's fairly clear within the bill that we're talking about specifically donated parcels that the educational
purposes is for the building of a school building either by the public school district or by an open enrollment public charter school. So obviously the land use would then be, as far as educational purposes, is for education generally within that building. Thank you. Thank you for the clarification
Representative Megan Godfrey
Unverified
31:12
and thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative
Murdoch, last, you need another one? Rep. Sam Murdoch, you have another question?
Okay, that was the last of the questions. I do
have some testimony from people that have signed
up, if they still want to come speak. Cliff McKinney. They're for it, I'm sorry. Yes, they are for
it. Not that I'm sorry they're for it, but I kind of said that wrong. If you will state your name and who you're with, you're recognized to speak for this bill. My name is Cliff McKinney. Make sure that mic is on there.
Cliff Mckinney
Unverified
31:58
Punch that button. My name is Cliff McKinney. I'm an attorney at Quattlebaum Grooms and Toll, and I helped author this bill. I'm happy to help answer questions if there are any specific ones and discuss it any further if there's any issues or questions. But I do appreciate the representative and all the information he was able to provide. One point I do want to clarify is there is no prohibition on the community organization selling it if they wanted to, though ideally then the community organization, because they are non-profit, would have to take that money and spend it for other purposes related to what that community organization is allowed to do.
And community organizations are defined in the current Homestead Act. We're just not amending that part of the act. Representative Love, you still
Speaker 147
32:45
have a question on that? You don't? Okay. Anybody have a question for Mr. McKinney?
Thank you, sir. Thank you. I have, I believe, a Joe Harris. Is that correct? Here to speak. I don't know if they're in this room or the other room.
I believe it says 1113. doesn't say for or against on here. Mr. Harris, are you in the other room? If you are,
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
33:25
please come forward. No. I'm getting a signal. I don't think he doesn't. He's in the other room to testify for it, but. Was it for it? Yeah, he was
for it. Okay, then we'll move on. Are there any other questions?
No more questions I see? Are you closed? I'm closed for the bill. Do I have a motion on this, Representative? Motion do pass. I have a motion do pass. Any discussion on the motion, Representative Vaught? As
Chair
Unverified
33:56
amended, right? I just made a... Yeah, well, yeah, okay. Maybe you can clarify something
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
34:01
for me. So if they sell it, they're going to get a profit from it,
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
34:10
from that land that's been donated to them.
If it was given to them and they sold it, it would be
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
34:26
a profit, yes. They would have to use that money for their charitable purposes. Yes, I agree with that. But my question is, Mr. Chair, if they sell it and it was designated for low-income homes, that area, and they sell it to something other than low-income homes or donate it to a school,
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
34:43
then anybody can build there. Am I missing something? I mean, that kind of caught me off guard.
And I'm going to say that's another type of legislation that's not really included in his bill, but that would be something totally different because that would be something they're doing, not what this is doing. Okay. But I'm sure when they took that land from the land commissioner and he gave them, there's some stipulations. Okay. And I don't know what those are. I couldn't tell you. So there's probably a stipulation if they keep it, use it for low-income housing, that's great.
If they decide to sell it, they have to turn around and use that money for some reason for low-income housing or something to that degree. And I'm sure there's stipulations. I don't think they could just sell it, pocket the money, and, you know, have a
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
35:31
big party. Okay. I just took pause at that whenever he said that. Thank you, Mr.
Chair. Any other discussion on the motion? Representative Beck.
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
35:41
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So just crystal clear, they could sell
the property, but they would have to sell it as far as this bill is concerned.
You can't ask him questions. This is discussion among members. Okay. So
Speaker 78
35:52
they can sell the property, but they would have to sell the property to a public school or open road. I think that's what this is. I think it's the basic of this bill. But that's
all this does. This bill does not sell it to them. They can give it to them. They can give it to them. They can't sell it to them. It's not about
selling. This bill has nothing to do with money. I thought we had a gentleman
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
36:15
who just said that they should sell it. Well, he
might have said they could do something with it other than this,
but this bill actually lets them take it over or take it and do it. As
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
36:25
I understood it, he was saying that they have the right to sell it if they want to right now for a profit and the profit then has to roll back into their non-profit community organization this bill does nothing to affect that they can still do that but this bill allows them to donate the land to a recipient who could then use the land for educational purposes so it gives them another option short of selling land now if they want to they can donate it if they've held it for three years and haven't been developed
yeah okay you're good thank you okay representative uh walmay
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
37:01
I'm good, Mr. Chair. I was trying to make that point. Representative Johnson made it. That's okay. Good. All
right. Any other discussion on the motion? Seeing none, we have a motion on the table. Do pass. All in favor, say aye.
Aye. Any opposed, no. Motion carries. Took a little while to get there, but we got
there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee. All right. I'm trying to see who runs McClure I believe you're representing McClure aren't you the first
build up 15 SB 15 that's
correct I'm sorry I don't have you on here so I
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
37:44
didn't see that so representative McClure district 26 and I will try to be much easier on you
with this the big dogs just came in
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
37:55
so So here they are. So if I get peppered with questions, they will be here to handle this. That's the
offensive line for A-State right there.
They may be on the defense today,
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
38:13
though. Please remember they have my
back. This is a very simple bill. the College of the Ouachita's Board of Trustees, which I was a part of, in February of 2019, we voted to join or align with the ASU system. Then in September of 2019, we voted to change the name to Arkansas State University Three Rivers. Through all the wonderful evaluations,
review and scrutiny of the Higher Learning Commission, they have approved that merger and for ASU Three Rivers to join the ASU system on January 1st of 2020. Obviously, the legislature was not in session last year, so this bill goes through and corrects all the code and changes to any of the name College of the Ouachita's and changes it to ASU Three Rivers and deletes some of the outdated language as it goes back to two-year colleges all the way back to 1991
that's no longer relevant today. So that's basically it. It's very, very simple. And I will probably refer any questions to these guys. Do we have any questions? Okay. Representative Clear, is this
the one you said was on the board member of this college for a while? Were you on the college
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
39:43
board? Yes, I was the vice chairman of the College of Ouachita's Board of Trustees and I'm the vice
chairman of what is now called the Board of
Speaker 179
39:51
I kind of thought so, just to make sure.
Okay. Seeing no questions, are you closed? I'm closed, sir. Do you have a question? Yeah, I don't have a motion. Are you closed for your bill? Yes, sir. What's your motion? Motion do
pass. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Any opposed, no. Congratulations. You have
passed your bill. Thank you very much. Representative Womack, you are recognized to present SB 116.
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
40:25
Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. This bill is actually in the same vein. I have a whole page of talking points, but I'm just going to hit a couple of high points and be happy to answer any question uh this bill eliminates the board of trustees of henderson state university and consolidates those duties and responsibilities with the asu board of trustees and renames that board of the arkansas state university into the arkansas state university system board of trustees currently the asu system has board has five members and this will expand that to seven
to be appointed by the governor and the bill is structured so that one member will be up for reappointment each year. This is the final step of the merger for Henderson into the ASU system. Henderson's name will not change and they will continue to have their own appropriation bill. Once this is passed and signed by the governor they'll become a campus of the ASU system. This change has been approved by the Higher Learning Commission and there's also a whole lot of cleanup just
and deletions of things that are no longer relevant to the university. There is no opposition to this bill that I'm aware of, and I have daily contact for really the last few years because I live, one, I represent Henderson, and two, I live bordering their campus, and if there was any opposition, I would definitely know about it, so I would appreciate a good vote.
Speaker 97
41:54
Representative Lowry. Thank you. Representative Womack, I know we're, you
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
41:59
know, in the beginning stages of this process,
but one of the concerns that has been presented to me would be, and I know this is totally up to the governor, but possibly I know I see President Welch here might be able to help allay fears that members of the existing board who, frankly, might have been responsible, looking the other way on some of the financial problems there, that they would be appointed to this board. I would like to know if there are some assurances
that we're going to have some fresh eyes and fresh perspectives related to Henderson on this ASU board. Sure. With the chair's permission, may I ask Dr. Welch to the
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
42:43
table? Yes. Yes. Just state your name and who you're with.
Speaker 187
42:57
Chuck Welch, president of the Arkansas State University System. And as you stated, Representative Lowry, I mean, that is solely the governor's decision. With that said, to my knowledge, the members I think you're referring to of the current Board of Trustees
have not applied to be members of our new board. So with that said, I would expect that there would probably be, as you phrased it, fresh eyes, but I can't guarantee that, obviously, because I don't get a say in that either. But I don't think that's
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
43:28
going to be the case. Follow up. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. And I know, as I said, this is the beginning stages, so you may actually have applicants from the existing board. But I would hope any input that you can give to the governor on, you know, there were some board members that were trying to raise the concerns and trying to get someone to notice that there were financial problems there.
Those are the kinds of board members that I would like to see representing Henderson, and I hope that you would also feel the same way.
Yes, sir. Absolutely. Thank you. Any other questions? You say it was in the early stages. It's kind of been late stages. I think this has been going on for a while. But
anyway, thank you, President Welch. I appreciate that. Representative Womack, I see no more questions. I just
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
44:28
have a motion at the proper time.
You have a motion? Do pass. Okay. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, no. Congratulations, you passed your bill. Thank you, committee. Chuck, that's how we do business here. Glad to help you all out. Keep us informed on how
everything's going. Let's see, do we have any other bills? We still have time to run some
more bills. Let's see, HB 1103, is that your first bill?
That would be Representative Evans at the other end of
the table for that. While he's getting there, let me just put out to you all, if you have a bill that needs to be run on the House Education Committee, please re-text me or call me personally or catch me. As you know, there has been someone in this room that has put some bill out that people just don't like, and we have had our phones blown up. And so I have lost every text, every email that I had that I could go back and reference to.
So I'm not griping at you, Representative Lowry. Okay, we'll gripe it at you. So anyway, if you have a bill you want to run, please get it to me. I have some of you that have already contacted me that have on the list. So I'll be glad to try to get you on Thursdays. I have a list for Thursday already. And so next Tuesday, Thursday, so long. Let me know when you want to run your bill and be ready to run it. So, Rep. Evans, you're recognized for House Bill 1103.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
46:11
Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. House Bill 1103 deals with provisions of current Arkansas code concerning how public school academic facilities and their transportation departments function. If you spent time reading through the bill, and I trust all that you did, there's a whole lot of talk of code in there and and so i thought i would just try to simplify and really bring to you exactly what this bill is talking about the first section is dealing with
safety of our students involving public school transportation and just putting another layer of protection on the drivers that are operating our school buses to make sure that our kids are are in the best care and safety as they are being transported to and from school. The second section deals with requiring that every school district currently under code has to consult with the division when it comes to the master plans of what they're going
to do to the improvement, update, and expansion of their buildings. The third section deals with the plan of how notification is given in regards to application and petitions of waiver. Currently under code, this has to be done by certified mail. The department has to utilize inefficient staff to put together all this certified mail and the cost of the postage to do that. And then the last section involves partnership program funding and how districts can work with the department to put a plan together as far as not just maintenance for their equipment, but also unscheduled maintenance so they're getting the rotation of their equipment into the program, utilizing the CMMS, which is the computerized maintenance management system that's offered as free to the schools.
So in short, what we're talking about is safety for our kids, making more efficient use of the way that the department is communicating in regards to facilities, upgrades, maintenance of their equipment, and it's a cost savings. There was a fiscal impact done on this bill, and BLR is reporting that we're looking at a $3,000 savings per year by the passage of this bill. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Chair
Unverified
48:38
Representative Love, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
48:45
Chair. On line 26, and I'm just curious. So it says under the age of 19, how does this align with our current, I guess, when you issued a current driver's license? I guess I got mine around 18 years of age. I guess, could someone in essence have a
legitimate driver's license but then not be able to drive a school bus because of their age?
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
49:15
I'd be happy to, at the pleasure of the chair, to have Mr. Tim Kaine from Facilities and Transportation for the department come up and address that. He is welcome to come up. No, no,
if you would just state your name and who you're with, you're recognized to
Speaker 202
49:41
speak. Tim Cain. I'm the Director of Facilities and Transportation.
And, sir, I'm sorry, would you mind repeating
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
49:49
the question? Okay, so I guess my question is this. On line 26, it goes under the age of 19. And so I was just asking, could someone actually have a legitimate driver's license, but just due
to their age, not be able to drive a school bus? I mean, how does this align with our current licensing practices in the state?
Are we just saying just because they're under the age of 19, they cannot drive a school bus? but they can actually have a legitimate driver's
Speaker 203
50:32
license. Okay, so are you referring to the CDL requirement? I guess
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
50:36
I'm referring to this bill. I'm referring to the line 26 of this bill. Okay, they can't get their
Speaker 202
50:43
CDL into their 21, I believe. Okay, all right, so that's what
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
50:47
I needed to know. Okay, thank you. I apologize for the confusion.
Are there any other questions for Mr. Yes, not. Okay. Any other questions on committee? Seeing none,
Rep. Evans, are you closed for your bill? I'm closed and motion do pass. All right,
I have motion do pass. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, no? Motion
Speaker 194
51:21
carries. You're recognized to present HB 1104.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
51:25
Thank you, committee members, for the good vote on that. So if you were in committee meeting last Tuesday, I brought this bill to you, 1104, an act to amend the provisions regarding code concerning special school elections. Due to the fact there were some questions on that and that it was on the consent agenda, we pulled this back and just put it on the regular agenda us so that we could have additional members of the department here to answer any questions of your concerns. But in short, currently under code, the commissioner of elementary and secondary education has
to approve the date of the special election. However, due to the way the code is written right there, there is no basis provided to the secretary for that decision. And as noted also last week, that also, since there's no basis, that gives him, does not give the secretary the authority to deny such a request. And we were nodded last week under any knowledge that the secretary had ever denied one due to this purpose.
And so I'll be happy to answer any questions in regard
Speaker 194
52:46
to that. Any questions? Seeing none. Seeing no questions, then I'll close for the bill,
and motion do pass. Okay. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed,
no. Motion carries. You are ready for HB 1151.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
53:07
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the vote on that previous bill. Members, as all of you know, in your communities, your school districts have been irregularly affected in many negative ways due to the coronavirus. Our teachers, our administrators have been put under tremendous undue stress, just basically, quite honestly, to keep our doors open and keep a place for our kids to go to school. As you may remember, due to the fact that school was dismissed in March of 2020, the normal regular scheduled April testing for the 19-20 school year did not happen.
Also, as we wade through this pandemic, and I'm not sure how far ahead of it we are than we were back a year ago, we're not for certain exactly what's going to happen in the 2021 school year. And so what this bill does and what we're asking is that due to the impossibility for schools to not be tested in the 19-20 school year and the uncertainty that they're going to be properly tested in the 20-21 school year, that we suspend the public school rating system that is given based upon those test scores.
When I started kind of thinking through this bill and talking with teachers, I cannot tell you the relief in their faces and in their voices just to know that they were not going to be judged on their performance as they have tried to wade through this pandemic, keep kids in class, try to deliver the proper education virtually, dealing with all the continual quarantines. And I think it would be very unfair for a judgment to be placed upon them with an A through F grading system, especially since no proper testing had been given.
Speaker 212
54:56
With that, I'll answer any questions. Representative
Speaker 211
55:05
Pike. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Charlene Fite
Unverified
55:08
Mr. Chair. Representative Evans, was this brought to you by an organization, or was this generated from
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
55:14
yourself? No, ma'am. It was actually just the fact that as being involved with my local district and seeing the distraught that there was amongst our faculty members of just trying to get through the year,
And as I talked to them about expectations and goals, quite frankly, they're just trying to get through every day. And as I talked to them, I talked to the different curriculum teams and talked to administration. We just all agreed that we needed to try to figure out a way to suspend this program for a year. We're not trying to undermine the program. We believe and support the program. But we wanted to just kind of put this thing on halt for a year. Let's get through this pandemic. I will say that I did, before I took it any farther, I did go meet with the Department of Education.
They were in complete support of the bill, and I believe that they would be here to speak on its behalf as well, if
needed. I'm sorry, we're taking care of some other business. Anybody else have a question? Representative Love, go
Speaker 200
56:20
ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Representative Evans, if we don't suspend this, what would happen?
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
56:26
So, if we do not suspend the program for, well, first we have to, we would have to establish the fact that there is going to be testing,
and I'm not sure that we're going to have that. Then what we could, I guess, in essence have is the organization that facilitates this program could go ahead and establish some type of arbitrary letter grade on a school based upon some ambiguous rating system of how that school performed this year.
Chair
Unverified
57:09
You there? Okay. You good? Representative Beck, you recognize. Thank
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
57:18
you, Mr. Chair. The rating system for schools, are you familiar with the different attributes or whatever
they – is it just test scores that they use or is it other things? Mr. Chair, if it would be the pleasure of the
Speaker 222
57:36
chair, I invite Secretary Key to come and fully give a good answer on that.
Speaker 224
57:41
He may. Mr. Secretary? Johnny Key, Department of Education. There are multiple data points that are used in establishing the ESSA School Index. The ESSA School Index takes into account test scores on the achievement side, but it also takes into account student growth. We've broken it down into elementary, middle, and high school,
So there's different weighting of the factors at each of those levels. For instance, in elementary school, growth is 50% of the score. That's something that our educators around the state have been asking for as we move from No Child Left Behind to the Every Student Succeeds Act. So, you know, we also, at the high school level, you have what we call the SQSS, school quality and student success factors.
15% of the high school score is based on components like community learning service credits that are awarded and a number of other factors that come into that that look broader than just the test scores. We also look at graduation rate at that level. That's all part of the ESSA School Index, and then that ESSA School Index gets translated to a range,
and the A to F is set according to the ranges of those scores. Follow-up? So
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
59:21
what percentage of the data points would be either non-valid or, you know, I understand that we're not testing, so that obviously wouldn't be a valid data point. But if you pulled that out of there, would the rest of it be? No, we would not.
Speaker 224
59:42
And that's why we support this, because if you're going to have a rating system, it needs to be reliable, it needs to be consistent.
It needs to be stable, and for this testing year, with the year that we've had, we could not say that the data would be consistent or reliable or stable across all of our schools. So the bulk of the waiting still is a result of our statewide assessment. And so when you pull that out, then you are left with a number of things that still, even graduation rate, you know, can be impacted.
So there are a number of things that we would look at and just say, look, this is not a year to issue this type of rating because of the instability that COVID-19
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
1:00:38
has created. Okay. Another follow-up, please? So, and I'm just looking forward next year, all right? we're in here uh how is this going to affect starting this thing next year let's say the pandemic's over would say that we obviously don't have student growth right because we didn't do
anything this year so well so you see i'm saying it just seems like we don't
Speaker 224
1:01:02
get back into it yeah we we will have student growth all right so we are going to have the year-end assessment All right, so there will be a measure of student growth. That instability for this year is still going to reverberate through our data system in the coming years. But for next year, as we get back to what we hope is more stability in that data,
then we would look at continuing and picking up the ratings system then. But there will still be a measure of instability there. But we feel like that for this particular year, we just need to set that aside. And we will continue to study the data. We work with the data team from the University of Arkansas. They are always helping us to model the data to understand what some of these missing pieces are. and we'll have a better idea a year from now what, you know,
the next school year results will
Speaker 29
1:02:12
Chair. Representative Murdoch. I think Representative Beck touched – hold on, Senator
Speaker 236
1:02:17
Key, Commissioner Key, Secretary Key. Yes, sir. A
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
1:02:21
lot of keys. I think Representative Beck hit most of it, But going forward, so the assessment will be done at the end of the 2021 year.
Correct. But considerations will be taken for the conditions by which that we, that the school districts worked under, so to speak. so that we'll be, whereas this 20, this 19-20, I guess, year, that's not being dealt with at all. That's what this bill is kind of about. We are
Speaker 234
1:02:54
still going to collect the data. We just will not
Speaker 224
1:02:59
apply it in a school rating in an A to F fashion. So schools will still have an ESSA index based on the data we get from the assessment.
It just will not be used for this purpose. just as last year we didn't have any data you know we because we lost that entire year for assessment this year we're getting back into it but the important thing is we believe we need to to get this data so we can understand the total impact that uh covet 19 has had right right from district to district and even school to school right not for punitive measures but
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
1:03:38
just for historical data as we go forward to make a real relative view of what happened.
Yes, sir. As we go forward. That makes
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
1:03:51
sense. Okay. Thank you. Representative Love. I think, Mr. Chair, my question is answered because, well, I guess I'll ask it like this just for my clarification. So you did say that you're going to be collecting data. You're just not going to be given the grades? Yes, sir. Is that what you're – okay, because that's what I wanted to see – that's what I wanted to actually hear,
because I wanted to know if there was a baseline and also kind of what was the effect of this year moving forward. So – but you are
collecting the data, and you're just not applying the grading scale. Correct. Okay, that's
Speaker 129
1:04:30
what my question was about. So thank you. Yes, sir. Representative Meeks.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
1:04:36
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, Mr. Secretary, the original purpose of having this grading system is accountability to the general public to make sure that we're providing a quality education to our students.
And I would argue that during these challenging times that that accountability is probably even more so important than it is during a normal year to make sure our students are still getting a quality education through these challenging times. A lot of us have a concern, and I know a lot of the parents that I talk to, are how our students are suffering academically and are we going to lose two or three years worth of students because they're not getting the instruction due to the disruptions of the virus.
And so what I don't want to see happen is us lose that accountability when I think we need to have it even more so. And so as I understood through your testimony, and correct me as I'm wrong, you're still making what data you have available to the general public so we maintain that accountability and we continue to see how well we're doing at trying to meet the challenges of the pandemic, even though we're not going to sign a letter grade this year just because we simply do not have enough data to do so in a fair way.
Is that a correct statement? So the accountability is still there. That's correct. We're just leaving that one piece
Speaker 224
1:05:58
out. There is a comprehensive report card that we are required to issue for every school. That comprehensive report card will still be issued. We will issue that next year based on the data that we have. The only component is that we are asking to set aside is this A to F rating. All right.
Speaker 22
1:06:16
Thank you. Thanks, Chairman. All right. Seeing no more
questions. Thank you, Commissioner. any other questions for brian
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:06:27
representative evans i'm sorry thank you committee members those are very good questions because at the end of the day i i thoroughly believe in transparency uh i applaud the reason that this system was put in place however uh and i know that the data is going to be given and what it's really going to do is it's going to kind of give a little bit of a reset it's going to provide some new data just to see how our schools are able to perform through this um and and so uh but i think right now if you look across our districts across the state our our teachers are they're focused on
Chair
Unverified
1:06:59
student survival right now and not student not necessarily just student growth and so don't close
don't close you have a testimony from someone else so are you ready for that yes okay if we have any more questions and we'll let you close that we hear the testimony Gary Newton has signed up to speak against this bill. Gary, if you're in hearing distance, please come in.
Mr. Newton, if you'll take a seat at the table, state your name and who you're with. you're recognized to speak against 1115.
Gary Newton
Unverified
1:07:48
No, I'm sorry, 1151. I get it right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Gary Newton. I'm with Arkansas Learns, which is a consumer's voice in public education. I come to speak today because we were the initiators of A through F grades for schools. It simplified a system to give maximum user friendliness to parents in a system that
they could understand. So we had Arkansas as a national leader when it comes to education data, but it's useless if it's not understandable. So the clarity of A through F was intended to provide a snapshot of how individual schools are performing for parents. To Representative Meek's point, now more than ever, that data and that snapshot is important to parents.
We have schools performing very well considering the situation, and we have schools performing very poorly considering the situation. Many of those schools are in the same districts, and it's incumbent upon us to do everything we can to illuminate the performance of schools, even during our most trying times. The challenge we have, I believe, is viewing grades as punitive.
We do not do that with our students. We use that as a marker of how our students are performing. if we can get beyond looking at grades as though they're punitive and look at them as though they are a gauge of how respective schools are doing we will all be the better for it we were also the initiators of reward schools we proactively went to the governor early in the pandemic last year and suggested even though he probably had already thought of it of not doing reward funding last
year because we would have no summative test, but also the $7 million in funding could aid the state's budget. I noticed that there is no prohibition coming on reward schools and their associated funding for this school. We trust the department. Last year, there was no summative test and the department chose not to do A through F grades based on the fact that there was no summative test. We don't know this year. Right now it is scheduled to have a
summative test, but we don't know what will happen. There's a new administration in Washington. ESSA scores will be tabulated, but we don't know what is going to happen. We would encourage the legislature not to suspend grading because that ties the hands of the department. Let the department determine if we have summative testing this year, if A through F grades are warranted.
We believe that's a better pathway. Our concern has always been a retreat from transparency and accountability. And while I respect the reasons that this was brought forward and deeply value the sacrifices that our educators have made across the state, we also owe our parents and our communities and our taxpayers to be as transparent as possible about how schools are performing during this time. Thank you very much. Representative Murdoch, you're recognized.
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
1:11:22
Thank you. So how under the conditions that we are, that the school districts had to perform under, as you know what they were, that picture that does need to be noted for historical data, as the commissioner, as the secretary mentioned, and I applaud that from that standpoint. But I think what you're saying is, at this point, don't suspend the possibility of a letter grade. What, in your view, would a letter grade show when you take into account
that the differences of how the pandemic affected areas, How could the department even justifiably or equitably apply letter grades whereby someone would not be punitively damaged, possibly, by a grade, a letter grade? Because it's been so different but impactful everywhere. And the consideration that's being given by the author, I think it makes so much sense that we don't rush to any type of, you know, in a letter grade is a judgment.
And we don't have to get to that. And I know you're saying let's just let the department make that decision at some point because you're not saying give a grade, but you're saying let's not suspend and allow them to make a decision, correct? That's correct, sir. Okay, so I respect what you're saying, but I think what I want to give credit to the legislature for doing their job, our job is to do this, to bring this stuff forward, to bring the legislation like this forward to represent our various districts, communities. Obviously, we are in touch with our districts, our local leadership, our school boards, our superintendents.
And so that's what we speak to when we come as people to the people's capital. You understand what I'm saying? So that's what makes this make sense, along with the impact of the pandemic. So it's not necessarily not honoring the taxpayers. We are honoring the taxpayers, and we're trying to give them consideration with this type of legislation. So that's why, but I do understand what you're saying about possibly delaying it.
I understand what you're saying, but I just think
Speaker 32
1:13:51
that the legislation gives us a chance to give
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
1:14:05
them consideration for the impact. Thank you, Chair. Representative Ball. Thank you. Nope,
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:14:09
there it is. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree with Representative Murdoch and what he brought forth. You alluded to some schools are performing very well and others are performing very poorly. What data are you leaning on for that assessment that you just gave?
Speaker 250
1:14:24
Well, if I was conveyed, that was an anecdotal assessment of my own
Gary Newton
Unverified
1:14:29
district. And the reason I said that is because within a school district, there are some schools performing very well in the delivery of virtual and in-person learning and i say that because of how the parents are receiving the instruction i i i'm a data person i would only rely on data but i know from the past that schools within districts perform differently
so it's important for the parents to know within respective schools who's doing it who even the during the most difficult times is getting the job done in the delivery and both in person and when necessary virtual learning all grades are is that snapshot of how schools are doing in time we need it now more than ever to know how they're doing during this data exists we had that long before but we had a system that parents could not understand because it was language familiar
to educators and levels familiar to educators but not familiar to parents so our concern is that even with summative testing the department may determine that it's that it's not appropriate to issue grades this year because they don't have enough of a base to determine growth or the testing numbers may be too low to actually report we just think that decision has many many different layers and is best determined by the department that is steeped in this information rather than
taking it completely off the table there may be a variation that the department could achieve to to still provide that transparency to parents but without saying you cannot do a through f this year Follow-up, Mr.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:16:28
Chair? You're recognized. So, to me, anecdotal data
is not true data. And just because one school does it different than another school does not mean that they're doing it poorly.
Speaker 250
1:16:39
They're just doing it differently. Well, it depends on the student performance.
Gary Newton
Unverified
1:16:47
Did the student grow? How did the student perform? it's not about the inputs it's about the results which is what summative testing gives us it's what formative testing gives us along the way and as the secretary mentioned those are but just a few data points in the overall grading system but we're not talking about adult input inputs with
this we're talking about student results and we just think it's important that the public taxpayers' parents know the student results in their respective schools. I'll come
Speaker 181
1:17:30
back. Representative Gough speaks. I'm sorry,
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
1:17:33
speaks. I think my question is probably to Representative Evans. Representative Evans.
Okay. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess probably there's so much I don't understand, but what you're presenting here today after listening to him, because I think he's made some very good points, but what you're saying is then what about our testing? Are we going to know where these students are? My concern has been all along, and I'm going to tell you,
I know there's teachers that is working night and day, answering phones and trying to help parents. And my heart goes out to them. It really does. But still yet, my heart is very heavy for students that are going to be so far behind. And some of them will never catch up. And so are we still going to be testing to see where these students are?
Speaker 260
1:18:46
Okay. Yes, ma'am, and I'll call Secretary Kerry Key, but I think what
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:18:53
we need to establish here and understand is the fact that we have a benchmark based upon current April of 2019 testing data. There was no 19-20 testing, which would have been, say, April of 2020. So when we're talking about student growth, we're looking at what was over here, and we do student assessments in this year, that's a big gap.
So it's not a level playing field
of a year-to-year ability for student growth, but I'll let Secretary Keebe comment on that.
Speaker 224
1:19:29
Representative Speaks, I think what I hear you asking, though, is within the system of assessment, what are we doing? And that's a great question because one of the things we recognized as we were preparing for this school year is that districts needed a stronger measure to really gauge not for the purposes of accountability
but for the purposes of understanding where their students are. So we had already in our statewide assessment system a K-2 assessment system that every school in the state, every elementary school, had to have a K-2 assessment, not for accountability very specifically let me say it was not uh to be judged for their schools to be judged on but it was uh to inform their instruction where do kids fall and what do they need we expanded that to eighth grade going into this school year so now every school had the
option of choosing from four vendors where if they wanted to use the vendor for their k-2 assessment they could expand that so that all the way through eighth grade we would be able to give them an assessment for understanding what those kids are missing that was critical when you look at nine weeks of last spring that for some students i mean they we did a great job our schools and teachers did a great job of shifting to virtual learning in a very short period of time but we know that there were significant shortfalls and shortcomings with that process so we wanted to
to give them something to measure, again, not as an accountability tool, but as an assessment tool for understanding their lost learning. Representative Evans is correct. When you think of an elementary school and 50% of their ESSA school index is based on student growth, that is year-to-year growth. We won't have year-to-year growth. Even with an assessment this year, the best we could do is to look at growth over two years.
that's where data becomes very unstable. And Dr. Denise Arola and the team there at the University of Arkansas has worked with us, has cautioned us against trying to establish any type of growth measure over that two-year period of time. So while I appreciate Mr. Newton's willingness and desire to give us the, for y'all to give us the authority to make the decision, there's nothing that is going to change between now and when we, administer the tests in the spring that is going to help this situation get any better because of
the 50% for elementary, 35% of waiting for growth factor for secondary. It's just not going to be stable enough for us to give an accurate picture. Follow-up? So
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
1:22:23
what you're saying then, the parents are going to find out just how their children are doing. That's at
Speaker 224
1:22:35
the end of this. Yes, they are.
And that's, you know, you all have probably heard from some parents that are saying, well, I'm just not going to take my child for them to test because I don't trust being on site and all those things. we understand all that what what we would say is look we have two prongs to this one is the federal side and at this point previous administration and the current administration have not given any indication that that they're going to waive anything for the spring assessment
so that's one thing so we federal law says we have to okay but the more important thing is parents do need to know what has happened with their students so we have multiple ways to find that the interim assessments the k-8 now that we have coupled with this year in this summative assessment we'll give data that is actionable at the local level to to make whatever adjustments they need to make going into the next school year okay thank you thank you representative goffrey
Representative Megan Godfrey
Unverified
1:23:42
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And this, Secretary Key, you did a great job of answering what my question was, which the point was made that the data exists by Mr. Newton. But what you're saying, what I'm hearing you say, is that the data that is necessary to fully compile the letter grade, which is based on the SS score index, does not exist because so much of that data comes from student growth.
And since we don't have test scores from last school year, we therefore do not have student growth data. So in order to fully give a letter grade based on the LSA school index, the data does not exist. Is that
Speaker 114
1:24:28
correct? That is correct. Thank you. Rep.
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
1:24:37
Suna Lowry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. When I ran the legislation phasing us out of using the PARC test and then transitioning to ACT, I got quite an education on assessment, more than I asked for.
And one of the things that was very clear, you talked about two points of data, but my understanding is to really be able to see a historical perspective, you have to have three data points to be able to establish whether there is growth or not. My concern, and Commissioner, if you can, or Secretary, if you can allay this, is that we are, and I know it's not intentional, you know, but we're kicking the can down the road
in terms of the reporting of data. And I think part of the evaluation, the letter grade evaluation of the schools, has to be a real-time knowledge of how that school or school district was able to adapt. whether they really and i understand i've talked to a number of teachers that are just so frustrated about uh doing the the teaching by zoom but then also having students in the classroom in real time
and being able to balance both of those but don't we need to know have data the parents know whether their school district is actually meeting the mark as far as being able to cope with this pandemic and still provide a superior educational product? I would submit yes, and we will
Speaker 224
1:26:20
have data. We just won't have an A to F rating. But
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
1:26:26
most parents, though, and one of the reasons why,
and I was a strong advocate for the A to F rating, is that the parents are overwhelmed. I didn't understand. I was overwhelmed by the pages and pages and pages of data and data points and percentiles and trying to make heads or tails of it. And that's why the legislature pushed for A through F so that parents who may not even have experience in looking through reports like that have an indication, have some type of picture
of how their local school is doing in terms of meeting the needs of their child. And I just have real concerns about us doing away with that easy-to-read, maybe easy-to-misinterpret. I understand that. But everyone's going to be in that boat. You know, if we're going to be providing information to students that show that they're lacking growth or that they're bad, I just feel like, especially with two years of not having data that is presented,
we obviously didn't do letter grades last year, right, because we didn't test. That's correct. So now this will be a second year where parents don't know how their school is being
Speaker 267
1:27:49
able to adjust and adapt to these challenging times. I would say if
Speaker 268
1:27:55
you're going to have a letter grade system, It needs to be reliable and
Speaker 224
1:28:00
based on data and based on the data we know we are going to have, the reliability simply isn't there.
Similarly, if we had a student system that was issuing grades based on unreliable data, parents would be calling you all and calling me saying this school is grading my kid based on unreliable data. We get that now. So, you know, we've joked with the superintendent association and said, well, maybe if y'all want to ditch the letter grade system, maybe y'all need to ditch the letter grade system for students.
Well, that, you know, they don't really like that suggestion when we make that. But the point is, without valid data, without reliable data, parents will have a letter grade for a school that simply isn't going to mean what we want it to mean. And that's why we believe that as an agency, this is the right move for this year. And then next year, we will pick back up. We will be filling in the gaps and getting back on track with a consistent and reliable data system
on which the system that you all passed will be trusted by our parents. Are you still representing
Chair
Unverified
1:29:23
Lowry? Yes. Representative Murdoch, you're recognized. I'm really good. I appreciate
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
1:29:30
what you answered all of my questions, Secretary Key, and I certainly appreciate your guidance and leadership on this and your perspective on this. I really appreciate it. Thank you.
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
1:29:42
Representative Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'm new to this committee, and everyone knows that. I'm like Representative Speaks. I'm trying to get my feet under me. As I understand the letter grade system as that was initiated, my assumption is there were some safeguards put in place that would try to level the playing field between the variety of different schools we have in the state of Arkansas. Is that correct? So, in other words, we have large schools, small schools, rural schools, urban schools. Everybody's getting a letter grade. and that there was some accountability to try to make apples-to-apples comparisons among the schools.
Speaker 224
1:30:16
Is that correct? Yes. So when we shifted from No Child Left Behind to the Every Student Succeeds Act, we changed our federal accountability system, but we also changed our state accountability system. We went on a 10-city tour when we had feedback from various groups in developing that federal accountability system. And in that federal accountability system, we were required by the ESSA law passed by Congress to have a system that was fair across all different types of schools, all different student populations.
So, yes, we did that. And then we converted that so that there would be alignment between the federal accountability and state accountability, which had been very disconnected in the past. that's where we use the the measures we develop measures for state accountability based on the ESSA accountability measures and then align the a to f with the ESSA school index process I
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
1:31:20
could have a follow-up so you know as I look
at the effect of the pandemic school districts I would
it would seem to me have been affected in a variety of ways there's been a lot of variability how schools have been asked to adjust to the pandemic. Some students, student bodies, a lot of folks chose to opt online. In some schools, not very many. In some schools, lots of teachers were quarantined. In some schools, less teachers were quarantined. So it would seem to me that in the process of assessing how a school did during the pandemic, that there would be a lot of variability, even maybe across districts between two schools, and how they were particularly
affected by the pandemic. Is there any way to account for that ability, for that variability in the same way we're trying to account for it with regard to A to B, A through F in a normal year? In other words, can you make true apples to
Speaker 224
1:32:16
apples comparisons without that data and is that data available? Not in the time that we have. I mean, could that be done? I would say probably, but not within the time frame. I mean, we modeled data for years, really, as we were preparing to move from the old accountability system to the new accountability system,
probably over two years or more where we were working on that. To do that now and look at the impact that is still changing day to day, I don't think that's even practical for us to
Speaker 274
1:32:53
attempt. Thank you. I appreciate it. Rosenblatt. I'm actually, let me take this off. I'm still a little
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
1:33:00
bit on the fence on the decision here. And the only reason why I'm considering voting in favor of this is just simply because you said it's not possible with the data that you do have.
And based on some of your testimony, you know, we don't have the growth data there. Well, if we go into next year, aren't we going to have the same problem, even if the pandemic's over, because you're not going to have anything reliable from this year to feed back to help get us back on. So are we actually looking at two to three years before we could be back to getting a stable letter grade? And then my second question is, and it's kind of a follow-up, I think, to what Representative Johnson was going there, is there some other metrics, if we gave you the flexibility, that you could use to provide a quality standard,
some accountability out to our parents in an easy understandable, and it may not even be an ABC system, but some other system to let parents know what the health of their local school is
Speaker 224
1:34:07
as we go through this pandemic. So yes, the missing data from last year will ripple through our data system for several years to come. And so that's where we just have to make a decision of, okay, at what point do we reinitiate. We feel like that getting the test data this year with going forward next year
and reestablishing the system is doable. It's much more doable than what we have right now. And I should make sure that I clarify, the growth is, because we're missing that year, there's a data point that's missing for every student in the state. And the way we calculate growth, it actually looks at where we predict their growth should be based on their history. So it's not just a year-to-year calculation, but it looks at their overall history of growth patterns.
But just for this year to set that letter grade out there without a year-to-year piece, that's devastating to the data calculations. But we believe that we have to start back as soon as we possibly can, and that would be next year. And as I said to Representative Johnson, I don't see, we simply do not have the capability to come up with an alternative measure
in the next three months, because that's what really we'd be looking at sometime between now and April or May to establish what an alternative would look like. The other thing you have with an alternative is you have a one-year kind of an aberration that may or may not be meaningful to our parents. We could issue a letter grade, but, you know, if you have wild swings and for some reason this year and what we put into that system uh set your letter grade up here
and the next year under the regular system we're back down here then that that creates a challenge to the consistency and the trust that anybody would have in such a data system all right
Speaker 244
1:36:26
thank you thank you mr chairman representative
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:36:29
thank you mr chair so schools are not asking for us to not test, correct? Well,
Speaker 275
1:36:36
I wouldn't say that. I would think they want
Speaker 224
1:36:40
to gather the data. Schools want to gather data. There are some educators that feel like they
should not have to test this year, so I can't say that there's 100% agreement on that topic, but I can tell you from the department's perspective, we feel for a number of reasons it's necessary and we're not so
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:36:59
the schools that want the data it's not about the letter grade it's about the punitive of the letter grade correct well I
Speaker 224
1:37:06
you probably would have to ask some superintendents that I would say based on my conversations that is the concern but that's always the concern I mean there are some people that just generally don't want a letter grade
system it's exacerbated this year because of the pandemic and if we just had testing last spring we wouldn't even
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:37:23
be discussing this today because we would have appropriate data. More than likely, that's correct. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a motion at a proper time. Representative Feight. Move for immediate consideration. I
have a motion of immediate consideration. That's non-debatable.
All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, no.
No. Motion carries. All right, what's the will of the committee? Do I have a motion? Motion to pass. Motion to pass. No discussion on the motion. All in favor say aye.
Aye. Any opposed, no? No. The ayes have it. Roll call. See two hands. Got
two hands. We have a roll call. John's not here. Hey, you've got Richard over there now.
Speaker 281
1:38:24
All right. Here we go. Representative Stephen Meeks. Aye. Aye. Representative Frederick Love. Representative Frederick Love. Representative Reginald Murdoch. Aye. Aye. Representative Gary Deffenbaugh. Yes. Yes. Representative Mark Lowry. No. No. Representative Richard Womack. No. No.
Representative Ken Bragg? Aye. Representative Charlene Fite? Aye. Representative Rick Beck? Representative Rick Beck? Representative Nelda Speaks? Aye. Representative Carolyn Brown? Representative Carolyn Brown? Representative Deanne Vaught? Yes. Representative John Maddox? Representative Steve Halliwell Representative Lee Johnson
Representative Gayla McKenzie Representative Gayla McKenzie Representative Megan Godfrey Representative Stu Smith Motion carries Thank you committee members That was the last bill of
the day Before y'all leave There again reminding you If
you have bills on the committee agenda
Not agenda but on the Roster to be run And it's ready to run I have a lot of them sitting there With no fiscal impact And so check on your fiscal impacts And get back with me We're starting to stack up a little bit So we want to get these off But please let me know You ready to run?
Agenda
REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1009 Wardlaw TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF EXCESS FOOD IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
HB1113 Dotson TO AMEND THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS URBAN HOMESTEAD ACT TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCHOOLS ON LAND DONATED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDS WHEN THE LAND IS NOT BEING UTILIZED AS A HOMESTEAD; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB115 A. Clark TO SUBSTITUTE "ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY THREE RIVERS" FOR "COLLEGE OF THE OUACHITAS" IN THE ARKANSAS CODE.
SB116 A. Clark TO AMEND THE NAME OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY; TO ABOLISH THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF HENDERSON STATE UNIVERSITY; TO AMEND THE BOARD OF ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY MEMBERS; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1103 Evans TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMIC FACILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION.
HB1104 Evans TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING SPECIAL SCHOOL ELECTIONS.
HB1151 Evans TO SUSPEND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL RATING SYSTEM FOR THE 2020-2021 SCHOOL YEAR UNDER § 6-15-2105.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — EDUCATION COMMITTEE- HOUSE, Jan 26, 2021 | Agenda | 1 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Bruce Cozart Chair
Unverified
Speaker 2
Representative Jeff Wardlaw
Unverified
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Speaker 21
Speaker 22
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
Representative Reginald Murdock
Unverified
Speaker 32
Representative Jim Dotson
Unverified
Chair
Unverified
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
Representative Rick Beck
Unverified
Speaker 48
Representative Nelda Speaks
Unverified
Speaker 105
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 119
Speaker 123
Speaker 129
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 139
Representative Megan Godfrey
Unverified
Cliff Mckinney
Unverified
Speaker 147
Speaker 78
Representative Richard Womack
Unverified
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
Speaker 179
Speaker 97
Speaker 187
Speaker 201
Speaker 202
Speaker 203
Speaker 194
Speaker 212
Speaker 211
Representative Charlene Fite
Unverified
Speaker 200
Speaker 222
Speaker 224
Speaker 235
Speaker 29
Speaker 236
Speaker 234
Gary Newton
Unverified
Speaker 250
Speaker 181
Speaker 260
Speaker 114
Speaker 267
Speaker 268
Speaker 274
Speaker 244
Speaker 275
Speaker 281