JEFFERSON CITY —
One of the rare meaningful changes to school policy to overcome
Capitol gridlock in recent years opened the door for more charter
schools in Missouri.
Turns out, the new law pried open a loophole at the same time.
Districts that open charter schools would be allowed to double dip into the pool of state aid — getting paid twice for the same students and leaving less money available for others.
The loophole was an accident. That’s not in dispute. In fact, lawmakers and lobbyists involved say they would back a legislative fix.
But history suggests any education bill can quickly become contentious, even when widespread consensus exists. Even an everybody-agrees fix, then, might not come easily.
And some say the situation is also a prime example of shoddy lawmaking that has become more frequent in recent years.
Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, a University City Democrat, staged a four-hour mini-filibuster against the bill last year, complaining that it was “sloppily written” and hurried to passage without allowing her to fully study it in detail.
And that, she says, is how mistakes find their way into state law.
“The last four or five years,” she said, “I’ve noticed we’ve had to spend a lot more time going back and fixing our own mistakes.”
Supporters of the bill say two years of work went into getting the bill across the finish line.
“I don’t believe this loophole happened because people didn’t think about this bill enough,” said Tricia Workman, a lobbyist who helped draft the charter school bill on behalf of the Missouri Charter Public School Association. “It didn’t happen because the bill was rushed.”
Even the most thoroughly vetted legislation has the potential to have “ramifications that you can’t anticipate,” Workman said.
But in recent years, observers say, errors have become more regular.
In 2009, lawmakers accidently banned plastic containers, such as Tupperware, on Missouri’s waterways. The intent was to ban Styrofoam.
In 2011, legislation led to a legal battle over whether lawmakers had inadvertently outlawed the use of social media sites such as Facebook by teachers.
This month, the Missouri Senate finally passed fixes to a 2005 workers’ compensation law that had caused numerous issues for employers and injured workers.
The bill faces an uncertain future in the House.
Courts have also thrown out several laws recently over procedural mistakes in how they were passed. Those include campaign finance legislation and a bill to fund science and high-tech businesses.
“Some of the stuff we get done is flawed, and some is just plain old crap,” said Rep. Myron Neth, a Liberty Republican. “Things are done in a more knee-jerk fashion, and then all the sudden you wonder, ‘What did we just do?’ ”
Neth believes part of the blame falls on term limits, which Missouri voters approved in 1992.
Although he is a strong supporter of term limits, Neth said the loss of institutional knowledge among legislators is a major drawback.
“You used to have committee chairmen who knew more about their subjects than any lobbyist or staffer in the building,” Neth said. “You don’t get that anymore, which can open the door for mistakes to happen.”
Neth is proposing a state constitutional amendment that would let lawmakers serve their entire 16 years in one legislative chamber, instead of the current limits where terms are split between eight years in the House and Senate.
That would give lawmakers time to grow into the job, he said, while still making room for those with fresh ideas.
Don’t place all the blame on term limits, said Otto Fajen, a lobbyist for Missouri National Education Association who previously worked in the nonpartisan research division of the Missouri Senate for 11 years.
The nonpartisan staff that actually writes legislation has also changed over time, Fajen said. Instead of people coming into the job intent on staying for a career, he said, legislative research jobs are now seen as stepping stones to better-paying careers in lobbying or advocacy.
“A bill can touch so many subjects and so many state statutes, and over time you start to develop the ability to see the bigger picture,” Fajen said. “What we’re seeing now much more often is that something is put forward as if there were no existing laws already in place.”
As for the charter school law, the crux of the issue stems from how schools are allowed to measure attendance to receive state funding. Under the school funding formula, districts can use attendance data that is up to two years old.
Because of that, a district could move students into a charter school but base their student enrollment on the previous year’s enrollment.
That would send state money for same students twice — once for the charter and once for their previous attendance in a conventional public school, said Ron Lankford, deputy commissioner of financial and administrative services for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
“That would mean less money that is available for remaining districts,” Lankford said. “And that could be a substantial amount of money.”
Under the legislation, a district can enroll up to 35 percent of its students in charter schools. Smaller districts — those with fewer than 1,550 students — can enroll all their students in charters.
“I know from experience that it doesn’t take people long to figure out loopholes that could be a windfall to their school district,” Lankford said. “In tough economic times, people will get creative, and they wouldn’t be contrary to state law if they did this.”
Workman, the lobbyist who helped write the charter school bill, said it’s unlikely any new charters could be established under the law before the 2014-2015 school year at the earliest.
“But I would hope that superintendents wouldn’t use this loophole to game the system and double count for extra funding at the detriment of other students around the state,” she said.
Mike Lodewegen, a lobbyist for the Missouri Council of School Administrators, agreed that a fix is needed but said it’s not considered an immediate priority, since to his knowledge no districts are currently considering taking advantage of the loophole.
Lankford said the department noticed the issue last summer but has been “hesitant to put it on the radar screen, because we don’t see any districts moving out to quickly establish charter schools in the next year.”
“But in the long term,” he said, “it certainly would be something the General Assembly might want to take a look at to make sure that the system can’t be used in a way that is detrimental to other schools.”
Chappelle-Nadal introduced legislation on Tuesday designed to close the loophole. She hopes the situation will be a lesson to her fellow lawmakers.
“You can’t rush through this process,” she said. “You don’t handle legislation like it’s a drug deal.”
Turns out, the new law pried open a loophole at the same time.
Districts that open charter schools would be allowed to double dip into the pool of state aid — getting paid twice for the same students and leaving less money available for others.
The loophole was an accident. That’s not in dispute. In fact, lawmakers and lobbyists involved say they would back a legislative fix.
But history suggests any education bill can quickly become contentious, even when widespread consensus exists. Even an everybody-agrees fix, then, might not come easily.
And some say the situation is also a prime example of shoddy lawmaking that has become more frequent in recent years.
Sen. Maria Chappelle-Nadal, a University City Democrat, staged a four-hour mini-filibuster against the bill last year, complaining that it was “sloppily written” and hurried to passage without allowing her to fully study it in detail.
And that, she says, is how mistakes find their way into state law.
“The last four or five years,” she said, “I’ve noticed we’ve had to spend a lot more time going back and fixing our own mistakes.”
Supporters of the bill say two years of work went into getting the bill across the finish line.
“I don’t believe this loophole happened because people didn’t think about this bill enough,” said Tricia Workman, a lobbyist who helped draft the charter school bill on behalf of the Missouri Charter Public School Association. “It didn’t happen because the bill was rushed.”
Even the most thoroughly vetted legislation has the potential to have “ramifications that you can’t anticipate,” Workman said.
But in recent years, observers say, errors have become more regular.
In 2009, lawmakers accidently banned plastic containers, such as Tupperware, on Missouri’s waterways. The intent was to ban Styrofoam.
In 2011, legislation led to a legal battle over whether lawmakers had inadvertently outlawed the use of social media sites such as Facebook by teachers.
This month, the Missouri Senate finally passed fixes to a 2005 workers’ compensation law that had caused numerous issues for employers and injured workers.
The bill faces an uncertain future in the House.
Courts have also thrown out several laws recently over procedural mistakes in how they were passed. Those include campaign finance legislation and a bill to fund science and high-tech businesses.
“Some of the stuff we get done is flawed, and some is just plain old crap,” said Rep. Myron Neth, a Liberty Republican. “Things are done in a more knee-jerk fashion, and then all the sudden you wonder, ‘What did we just do?’ ”
Neth believes part of the blame falls on term limits, which Missouri voters approved in 1992.
Although he is a strong supporter of term limits, Neth said the loss of institutional knowledge among legislators is a major drawback.
“You used to have committee chairmen who knew more about their subjects than any lobbyist or staffer in the building,” Neth said. “You don’t get that anymore, which can open the door for mistakes to happen.”
Neth is proposing a state constitutional amendment that would let lawmakers serve their entire 16 years in one legislative chamber, instead of the current limits where terms are split between eight years in the House and Senate.
That would give lawmakers time to grow into the job, he said, while still making room for those with fresh ideas.
Don’t place all the blame on term limits, said Otto Fajen, a lobbyist for Missouri National Education Association who previously worked in the nonpartisan research division of the Missouri Senate for 11 years.
The nonpartisan staff that actually writes legislation has also changed over time, Fajen said. Instead of people coming into the job intent on staying for a career, he said, legislative research jobs are now seen as stepping stones to better-paying careers in lobbying or advocacy.
“A bill can touch so many subjects and so many state statutes, and over time you start to develop the ability to see the bigger picture,” Fajen said. “What we’re seeing now much more often is that something is put forward as if there were no existing laws already in place.”
As for the charter school law, the crux of the issue stems from how schools are allowed to measure attendance to receive state funding. Under the school funding formula, districts can use attendance data that is up to two years old.
Because of that, a district could move students into a charter school but base their student enrollment on the previous year’s enrollment.
That would send state money for same students twice — once for the charter and once for their previous attendance in a conventional public school, said Ron Lankford, deputy commissioner of financial and administrative services for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
“That would mean less money that is available for remaining districts,” Lankford said. “And that could be a substantial amount of money.”
Under the legislation, a district can enroll up to 35 percent of its students in charter schools. Smaller districts — those with fewer than 1,550 students — can enroll all their students in charters.
“I know from experience that it doesn’t take people long to figure out loopholes that could be a windfall to their school district,” Lankford said. “In tough economic times, people will get creative, and they wouldn’t be contrary to state law if they did this.”
Workman, the lobbyist who helped write the charter school bill, said it’s unlikely any new charters could be established under the law before the 2014-2015 school year at the earliest.
“But I would hope that superintendents wouldn’t use this loophole to game the system and double count for extra funding at the detriment of other students around the state,” she said.
Mike Lodewegen, a lobbyist for the Missouri Council of School Administrators, agreed that a fix is needed but said it’s not considered an immediate priority, since to his knowledge no districts are currently considering taking advantage of the loophole.
Lankford said the department noticed the issue last summer but has been “hesitant to put it on the radar screen, because we don’t see any districts moving out to quickly establish charter schools in the next year.”
“But in the long term,” he said, “it certainly would be something the General Assembly might want to take a look at to make sure that the system can’t be used in a way that is detrimental to other schools.”
Chappelle-Nadal introduced legislation on Tuesday designed to close the loophole. She hopes the situation will be a lesson to her fellow lawmakers.
“You can’t rush through this process,” she said. “You don’t handle legislation like it’s a drug deal.”
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/02/26/4088476/missouri-charter-school-rules.html#storylink=cpy
0 comments:
Post a Comment