SENATE BILL REPORT
SB 6733
BYSenators Bailey, Rinehart, Anderson, Murray, Lee, Gaspard, Metcalf, Craswell, Bender, Benitz, Nelson, Johnson, Thorsness, Patrick, Rasmussen, Sellar, Smith, Warnke, Vognild, Smitherman, DeJarnatt, Madsen, Conner, Wojahn, Talmadge, Bauer, Williams, Kreidler, von Reichbauer, Fleming, Barr and Sutherland
Establishing school improvement programs.
Senate Committee on Education
Senate Hearing Date(s):January 23, 1990; January 30, 1990
Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 6733 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.
Signed by Senators Bailey, Chairman; Lee, Vice Chairman; Anderson, Bender, Benitz, Craswell, Fleming, Gaspard, Murray, Rinehart.
Senate Staff:Larry Davis (786-7422)
February 2, 1990
Senate Committee on Ways & Means
Senate Hearing Date(s):February 14, 1990; February 15, 1990
Majority Report: That Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 6733 be substituted therefor, and the second substitute bill do pass.
Signed by Senators McDonald, Chairman; Amondson, Bailey, Bluechel, Cantu, Gaspard, Hayner, Johnson, Lee, Newhouse, Saling, Smith.
Minority Report: That it not be substituted.
Signed by Senators Gaspard, Moore, Niemi, Owen, Talmadge, Warnke, Wojahn.
Senate Staff:Ken Kanikeberg (786-7715)
February 19, 1990
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS, FEBRUARY 15, 1990
BACKGROUND:
The issue of "choice" as a strategy for promoting educational restructuring and reform continues to receive both national and state attention. The fundamental premise of a "choice" program is to allow parents and students the freedom to select the school of their choice. Current Washington State statutes allow school districts wide flexibility in establishing intra-district choice programs, and provide a framework for cooperating school districts to develop inter-district choice programs.
The Education Commission of the States (ECS) advises that "choice" must be done carefully, linked with other school improvement strategies to achieve the long run goal of restructuring schools. The commission also states that linking "choice" with other school improvement strategies will involve new investments in education.
It is proposed that the state examine all issues relating to statewide open enrollment ("choice") and provide grant funding to districts to enhance their educational programs, prior to adopting a statewide policy on open enrollment.
SUMMARY:
Magnet Schools Grant Program. A Magnet Schools Grant Program is established and is administered by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI). The purpose of the program is to: provide eligible districts financial assistance for start-up costs to establish and operate magnet schools; help meet special needs related to eliminating minority group segregation and discrimination among students and faculty; encourage the voluntary elimination, reduction or prevention of minority group isolation in schools with substantial numbers of minority students; and encourage instructional programs to help attending students strengthen their knowledge of subjects and acquire vocational skills.
The term "magnet school" is defined as a school or education center that offers a special curriculum or special programs capable of attracting substantial numbers of students of different racial backgrounds. "Minority group isolation" means a situation at a school where the minority racial distribution varies more than 20 percent from the district average, provided that no single minority racial group exceeds 50 percent of the school's student enrollment.
A district is eligible for magnet schools grant funds if it has a minority student population in excess of 25 percent and: it is implementing a plan pursuant to a court order requiring the desegregation of minority group segregated children or faculty, or it is voluntarily implementing or will voluntarily implement if funds are received, a plan to reduce, eliminate or prevent minority group isolation in district schools with substantial proportions of minority group students.
The SPI makes allocation grants to eligible districts for start-up costs for magnet schools that are part of a desegregation plan and are designed to bring together students from different social, economic, ethnic and racial backgrounds. Magnet school grant funds may be used as follows for start-up costs and for first year operation costs for magnet schools: Planning and promotional activities directly related to academic programs and services, acquisition of books, materials and equipment, compensation of instructional staff at magnet schools, transportation costs, and encouraging parental involvement.
Eligible districts must file an annual application with the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Application criteria include assurance that districts will: use the grant funds for appropriate purposes, including promoting desegregation and encouraging greater parental involvement and decision-making; and not engage in discriminatory practices relating to the employment of personnel, the assignment of students, or design of extracurricular activities for students under the program.
In approving applications, the SPI must give priority to the number of minority students in the district and the number of minority students involved in the desegregation plan, the district's need for assistance in carrying out a desegregation plan, the likelihood of success of the desegregation program or project, and the level of collaboration among the district, higher education institutions, community-based organizations and others in developing the program or project.
The SPI will distribute funds based on districts' full-time equivalent student enrollment as of October 11, 1989. No more than 10 percent of an allocation grant may be spent by districts for planning. The magnet schools grant program expires June 30, 1991.
Special Needs Grant Program. The Superintendent of Public Instruction will establish a grant program to assist eligible school districts in meeting their special needs. The grant funds and new or existing programs enhanced by the funds do not become part of the state's basic program of education obligation.
Districts are eligible to apply for funds under two separate sets of criteria:
(A) Second class districts must meet the following six criteria: The median household income is at least 20 percent below the state average; the number of persons unemployed exceeds the statewide average by 20 percent; the number of families receiving support through the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program exceeds the statewide average by 20 percent or more; the assessed valuation of property for excess levy purposes would require a levy rate of more than $2.00 per $1,000 of assessed valuation to raise a 10 percent levy; receipt of federal impact aid does not exceed the maximum amount the district could raise with a 10 percent levy; and receipt of federal forest moneys does not exceed the district's basic education allocation.
(B) First class districts must meet three of the following four criteria: The district's annual average full-time equivalent student enrollment was 5000 or more for the 1987-88 school year; at least 45 percent of the lunches served by the district in the 1986-87 school year were free or reduced price meals; the district's dropout rate for the 1985-86 and 1986-87 school years was 20 percent or greater; and the number of non-English languages or dialects spoken by students in the district is eight or more.
Special needs grant funds are distributed equitably among the districts eligible under each set of criteria.
Districts submit a grant application which must: identify budgeted expenditures; have a description of the services, programs, or activities to be funded; have a description of how the use of the grant funds will be evaluated for effectiveness; document that at least one public hearing was held regarding the proposed grant application; and document that the development of the grant application involved teachers and other certificated and classified staff, administrators, parents, students, and members of the community.
Districts must submit a biennial report to the Superintendent of Public Instruction on the use of the funds. The Superintendent must report to the Legislature biennially on the special needs grant program. The first report is due December 1, 1991.
Enrollment Options Studies. The Superintendent of Public Instruction will conduct a study and report to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 1991 on the number of students participating in state and locally authorized enrollment options programs. The report must include findings and recommendations relating but not limited to: reasons most often given by parents and students for requesting enrollment in nonresident districts, the number of students both successfully and unsuccessfully requesting enrollment in nonresident districts, and the impact of existing enrollment options on issues relating to desegregation, school construction, transportation, local levies, special student populations, and school district consolidation.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction will conduct a study and report to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 1991 on the impact of open enrollment laws in other states. The report must include findings and recommendations relating but not limited to: Reasons most often given by parents and students for requesting enrollment in nonresident districts; the number of students both successfully and unsuccessfully requesting enrollment in nonresident districts; the impact of existing enrollment options on issues relating to desegregation, school construction, transportation, local levies, special student populations, and school district consolidation; and a cost-benefit analysis of the open enrollment programs in the states.
Using the results of the studies, the Superintendent of Public Instruction will submit to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 1992, recommendations regarding the establishment of a limited or unlimited open enrollment program in Washington effective with the 1993-94 school year.
The SPI is granted necessary rule-making authority for implementation of the magnet schools and special needs grant programs.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE:
Districts with desegregation plans, within five years of adopting a local open enrollment plan and if resources are available, should assure that all students have an opportunity to participate in the program.
The list of issues on which the Superintendent of Public Instruction reports, with respect to the impact of open enrollment laws in other states, is expanded.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE:
The enrollment options studies are unchanged. The grant programs are eliminated. The appropriation of $17.1 million is deleted. Enactment is contingent upon funding in the budget.
Appropriation: none
Revenue: none
Fiscal Note: available
Senate Committee - Testified: EDUCATION: Judith Billings, Superintendent of Public Instruction (pro); Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators (pro); Ken Watson, Seattle School District (pro); John Kvamme, Tacoma School District (pro); Donna Shy, Washington State PTA (pro); Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals (pro); Judy Hartmann, Washington Education Association (pro); Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association (pro); Carl Fynboe, Washington Federation of Independent Schools
Senate Committee - Testified: WAYS & MEANS: Bruce Agnew, Chief of Staff, Congressman John Miller; Ken Watson, Seattle School District; Dwayne Slate, WSSDA; Joan Terrill, Northport School District (WSSDA); Thelma Jackson, North Thurston School District (WSSDA); John Kvammie, Tacoma School District; Walter Ball, Association of Washington State Principals; Kris Van Gorkom, WASA; Judy Hartmann, WEA