Overview
Inside
Overview
Inside
Feb. 7-Feb. 11, 2011 Session Bills Reviewed
By Howard M. O’Cull, Ed.D.,
West Virginia School Board Association Executive Director
Listed below are West Virginia Senate and House of Delegates bills introduced Feb 7 – Feb. 11, 2011, during the First Regular Session of the 80th West Virginia Legislature.
Today is day 34 of the session, meaning there are 26 days remaining before the Legislature adjourns Midnight March 12, 2011.
February 21 is the last day to introduce bills in the Senate and the House. (There are certain exceptions, including supplemental appropriations bills for example.)
Bills reviewed are listed topically, beginning with public education bills. A series of education-related bills follow. Lastly, some measures are cited briefly. Senate bills are listed first.
Note: In some cases, much of the verbiage of a proposed statute is included, especially in terms of newly-proposed legislation.
A total 38 bills are reviewed.
For a copy of any bill, please contact WVSBA: 304.346.0571. You also may contact me at hocull@wvsba.org
Bills are posted on the West Virginia Legislature’s Web site: http://www.legis.state.wv.us
Editor’s Note: Listing is not exhaustive.
County Boards
Public schools would have to institute mandatory recycling programs
House Bill 3048. Proposed §18-2L-1 would require all public schools to “establish and implement aluminum container, glass and paper recycling programs at its facilities. To the extent practicable, programs for other metals, plastics, covered electronic devices, rubber and other recyclable materials may be established and implemented. The moneys collected from the sale of such materials shall be deposited and accounted for in the general budget for each public school.”
Additionally, the bill states, “In preparing the recycling plan as required under this subsection, the public school may address methods for the separate collection and recycling of covered electronic devices, including efforts by the public school with manufacturers, recyclers, retailers or other local governments for the collection and recycling of covered electronic devices.”
There are four House sponsors, including lead sponsor Del. Tim Manchin, D-Marion. Introduced Feb. 8. Referred to House Education, then House Finance.
Parents could petition school districts to covert a school into one of three possible models of “school level reform”
House Bill 3051. The purpose of this legislation is to create “The Parent Empowerment and Choice Act.”
Thus, the legislation would establish new §18-33-1 ff.
Essentially, a charter schools measure, this bill would:
Three “Intervention Schools”
“A restart model must enroll, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend the school.”
“These other schools should be within reasonable proximity to the closed school and may include, but are not limited to, charter schools or new schools for which achievement data are not yet available.
“In the event that no such school exists, the district will implement the educational choice model.”
“Universal Educational Vouchers”
- (75 percent) of the petitioned school's annual cost per pupil, including both operational and capital facility costs; or
- (75 percent) of the dollar amount the resident school district would have received to serve and educate the eligible student from state and local sources had the student enrolled there.
“Private schools”
- Allow parents to sign a petition “requesting that the county board…implement one or more of the three interventions (identified in the proposed statute with the county board being required) to implement the option requested by the parents.”
- Set the threshold for triggering the “parent empowerment” option to instances where “more than half of the parents or legal guardians attending the school, or a combination of more than one half of the parents or legal guardians of pupils attending the school and the elementary or middle schools that normally matriculate into a middle or high school, as applicable.”
- Require the county board to send “notification to the State Superintendent of Schools and the State Board of Education upon receipt of a petition. The county board…(is given 180 days) to employ the chosen model of reform.”
- Establish “one of more” intervention schools.
- Include the following intervention models –
- “Restart Model” – This “Model” is defined as “one in which a county board of education converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization or an education management organization that has been selected through a rigorous review process.
- “School Closure Model” – This “Model” is defined as one in which “a county board… closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the county that are higher achieving.
- “Educational Choice Model” – This “Model” “occurs when a county board of education implements a school voucher program.”
- “Universal Educational Vouchers – The proposed legislation contains the following provisions:
- “Any student of, or student who would naturally matriculate into, a school petitioned for the educational choice reform option will have the option to receive a monetary voucher to cover the cost of attendance at any private or other public school.
- “Any student of a petitioned school wishing to attend a private school will qualify for an annual scholarship in an amount equal to the lesser of:
- Any student of a petitioned school wishing to attend a different public school will qualify for any public school with no additional fee.
- Funds available to a student are calculated using an average of the last three budget years and recalculated each year.
- Funds are made available to each student until the earlier of (1) completion of their high school degree or (2) their twenty- first birthday.
- Students receiving voucher moneys are to be counted in the enrollment figures of its county board…for the purposes of calculating future voucher moneys.
- Students receiving voucher moneys more than the cost of tuition in a private school are given the opportunity to store that money in an educational savings account to be used for any additionally encumbered educational expenses. Qualifying expenses include, but are not limited to, tutoring, lessons, educational camps, school materials, textbooks and educational software.
- There are no additional regulatory powers granted to the state in this legislation.”
Bill does not expand state’s “regulatory authority”
Accordingly, based on section “i,” “(t)he education voucher reform option does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, its officers or any school district in any way.
“Any regulatory board in existence must be represented in at least half by members not a part of the public school system.”
Additionally, the bill has a definitional section, including definitions for an “education management organization,” “school district of enrollment,” and “school district of residence.”
“School management organization” is defined as a “for-profit or nonprofit organization that provides whole school operation services to a county board…”
Sponsored by Del. Jonathan Miller, R-Berkeley. Introduced Feb. 8. Referred to House Education, then House Finance.
Note: Similar proposals have been introduced or considered in a previous legislative session or sessions.
County board members would be able to receive compensation for attending training sessions
House Bill 3077. Discussed in the Feb. 11, 2011, issue of The Legislature, this measure would provide county board members $150 per session for attending training “sessions.”
Payment could be received for participating in up to “six” such sessions during any fiscal year.
There are five House sponsors, including lead sponsor Del. David Perry, D-Fayette. Introduced Feb. 9. Referred to House Education, then House Finance.
Note: Similar proposals have been introduced or considered in a previous legislative session or sessions.
