General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Weds., June 5, 2013
Even though the ‘official information’ site for the Delaware General Assembly does not reflect it, the House, operating with more speed than Legislative Council, passed two bills designed to curb production and sale of methamphetamine in Delaware. Both HS1/HB28(Smyk) and HB 130(Walker) unanimously passed the House, according to the News-Journal. And, according to House roll calls. Just not according to the ‘official’ record. Some things never change. For the complete incomplete record, check here.
The House has a huge committee day today. Loads of interesting and/or important bills. Here are some highlights:
The House Gaming and Parimutuels Committee will have a ‘discussion of internet gaming and update on casino expansion’. Don’t know who’s engaging in the discussion or who’s providing the update. The chair is Charles Potter. If you want to know, I guess you should call him. But not on his cell phone, since he’s already told a reporter to “lose my number”. I’ll be happy to lose his number once he loses his bid for reelection. So far, he’s been an embarrassment to the General Assembly. Don’t look for that to change.
Some bills, and some bill assignments, make you say ‘hmmmm’. Such is the case with HB 141(Q. Johnson) which “ensure(s) that chiropractors delivering chiropractic services in the state of Delaware are subject to the jurisdiction of the Delaware Board of Chiropractic.” First of all, don’t we do this already? And second, why is this bill not in the House Sunset Committee as opposed to the House Business Lapdog Committee? There’s a back story here, and I’d like to know what it is. My take? There’s a special interest that wants this bill. Maybe a politically-connected chiropractic practice?
A bipartisan Worker’s Compensation Task Force developed the recommendations in HB 175(Short). Also in the Business Lapdog Committee. Any opinions?
One of the most controversial bills before the General Assembly will be considered in today’s House Education Committee. HB 165(Jaques) would provide yet more funds to charter schools while allegedly toughening standards. Pandora and our commenters have covered this brilliantly here. I, for one, am sick and tired of the creation of yet another ‘separate and unequal’ public education system. Charter schools have been provided advantages unavailable to public schools. Fiscal failures get bailed out by the state at the expense of public schools. Charter students get transportation funding, public choice students don’t. And now the taxpayers are about to give charter schools an additional $6 mill in this year’s Budget and Bond Bills. The deliberate destruction of public schools, indeed. A true scandal propounded and compounded by the self-selecting corporate and political elites.
Lotsa bills in the House Health & Human Development Committee. HB 131(Walker) makes clear that an arrangement between adoptees and a ‘gestational carrier’ (surrogate) is a legally binding agreement. HB 163(Bennett) ‘requires the Department of Services for Children, Youth and Their Families to create and maintain a developmentally appropriate, comprehensive program that fully integrates independent living services from ages 14 to 21 and which will assist youth with their successful transition into adulthood.’
HB 146(Bolden) would add $25 to expenses for those committing crimes within the City of Wilmington. In other words, an additional source of city revenue. In the House Judiciary Committee.
HB 138(Barbieri) raises the tax on ‘moist snuff’ to bring it up to eliminate the disparity between snuff and other tobacco products. House Revenue & Finance Committee will determine whether this bill is up to snuff.
Rethugs are hard at work trying to turn back environmental progress when it comes to auto emissions. HB 6(Briggs King) would negate the adoption by DNREC of the California Low Emission Vehicle Program by requiring legislative approval for such adoption, approval that is not currently required. Two D’s on the bill: Rep. Lumpy Carson and Sen. Bob Venables…just in case you were in doubt as to whether this is a bad bill. In the House Natural Resources Committee.
Highlights from Senate Committee meetings include:
HB 116(Viola), which would permit race tracks to reduce days of operation in order to optimize their purse structures. Passed unanimously in House. In Senate Agriculture Committee.
SB 100(Sokola), which would adopt what are considered ‘best practices’ in deterring use of seclusion and restraint in public schools. In Senate Education Committee.
SB 82(Bushweller), which would seek a permanent solution to the ‘problem’ of veterans’ and fraternal organizations ignoring state gambling laws with their video machines. In today’s Senate Executive Committee. A pretty Solomonic solution:
This Act puts in place a permanent solution to allow for a fraternal or veterans organization with national affiliation or an organization whose membership consists primarily of veterans honorably discharged or active duty service member to operate charitable video lottery machines within their organizations upon approval from the Director of the Lottery. The business arrangement calls for the charitable gaming organizations to receive 60% of proceeds after players are paid and 40% shall go to the state to cover expenses of which 1% of the state’s proceeds shall be set aside to fund programs for the treatment, education and assistance of compulsive gamblers and their families. Each eligible charitable gaming organization may have up to 10 charitable video lottery machines plus one additional charitable video lottery machine for every 70 members of the charitable gaming organization over 500 members of said organization. Effective January 1, 2014, charitable gaming organizations will be required to donate at least 40% of the organization’s proceeds from charitable video lottery machine gaming annually to a charitable purpose. Finally, it requires the charitable gaming organization to adhere to the same guidelines for deducting from prizes of winners who are delinquent on the child support payments and sets a deadline of July 1, 2014, for these organizations to be connected to the state’s central system for reporting and auditing purposes.
It now appears that there is a substitute for SB 82, as SB 112(Bushweller) was introduced in the Senate yesterday and was laid on the table. Not in the sense of what went on in Tony DeLuca’s office, but rather this means that SB 112 could sidestep the committee process in the altogether. The synopses on the two bills appear identical, thus frying my synapses.
SB 97(Henry), which would add ‘gender identity’ to the “already-existing list of prohibited practices of discrimination and hate crimes. As such, this Act would forbid discrimination against a person on the basis of gender identity in housing, employment, public works contracting, public accommodations, and insurance, and it would provide for increased punishment of a person who intentionally selects the victim of a crime because of the victim’s gender identity.” In Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee will also consider HB 88 As Amended(Barbieri), which attempts to keep weapons away from those who are dangerously mentally-ill. The bill passed the House with only one no vote. You can read a compelling narrative on behalf of SB 97 here.
I can’t hope to top that, and I won’t. Except to say that the Senate has an agenda today. I don’t find much of interest there, but feel free to rummage around.
See ya tomorrow.
Tags: Delaware charter schools, El Somnambulo, Featured, Steve Tanzer Delaware, surrogate pregnancy, transgender equality, veterans' gaming Delaware
A comment over at Kilroys on HB 165:
I’d sure like to see those amendments (and hear the details of that lividness).
A whole bunch of new cosponsors have signed onto this clearly wired bill. There is a whole backstory to this bill starting with the Newark Charter expansion hearings a few years ago, and a FOIA-flouting Governors task force led by Terry Schooley.
I assume they’re livid at Baumbach?
Good. I’m tired of things being wired in the name of the Delaware Way (See: Brainard, Mark/Del-Tech).
There’s a lot not to like in that bill, and I salute Baumbach for taking this route. This is important stuff, and shouldn’t just be railroaded through.
The real story that everyone should be reading into is why — according to the House press release for 165 — DSEA “fully supports” this bill when the schools that employee their members are undergoing drastic cuts, but this bi provides for an up-to $5 million annual slush fund to charter schools. Why, DSEA?
Why, DSEA?
This is where it comes into play that the Governor’s task force conducted its deliberations in secret – no minutes, no public notification of meetings. DSEA was on that panel, and that is where the deals went down. But the panel was rigged with charter advocates.
Yep, deals cut behind closed doors. Plans to railroad this baby right through.
Classic Delaware Way stuff, and the elites have decided that we don’t have the right to know anything about it.
Which is why they’re so PO’d with Baumbach’s amendments. They don’t want any disinfectant of sunshine here.
What are they hiding, and why do they feel the need to keep it secret?
It’s a long story. Basically, the public face of the charter movement has been CSW for a long time, and charters were golden, with good public opinion and unquestioning media coverage. Greg Meece and the Charter Network were busy building their Rolodexes and making political connections. The Holy Grail was public capital funding, but they figured they could get around to it at any time.
But then at the NCS expansion hearings, critics showed up for the first time and pointed out the lack of diversity, and how NCS had somehow managed to engineer a dramatically lower percentage of low-income, black, ESL, and special ed students in its population. In a stinging and well-researched letter, Lillian Lowery approved the expansion, conditioned on NCS doing outreach to improve those stats.
The charter movement had never heard such language and wasn’t accustomed to being spoken to that way. One charter board member drama queen said: “Our state cannot take this divisiveness much longer.” – this after a few hearings that didn’t go charters’ way.
The task force was formed, stacked with charter supporters. The panel produced no minutes and no written recommendations, except one summary document emerged which looked a lot like HB 165. It wasn’t an advisory group – it was a bill-drafting committee.
Several individuals including myself have attempted to FOIA information about the meetings, but were told the group was not a public body under FOIA (it clearly is). That is another long post in itself.
Larry Nagengast’s coverage with WDDE has been outstanding. Here is a news story which is the only public list of members.
What happened when you appealed the FOIA decision to the AG?
That doesn’t particularly look like a stacked membership to me.
I DO, however, wonder why there’s such a need for secrecy.
Really? I’m supposed to take on the Governor, his people, and the Democratic leadership of the General Assembly all by myself? Would people like you have had my back, or just post sneering comments? And there is a good chance the AG is wired too on this one.
That said, I’m considering it. I understand FOIA better now and I have collected more information than I did when this started. The meetings are over but it’s not too late to petition for an opinon finding the governor’s office in violation of FOIA. How realistic does it sound that Beau will do that?
I’d like to see those amendments, too. Bet they’re good!
Here’s the thing with Ed Reformers and charter advocates. (I have no idea what’s up with DSEA. That’s just nuts.) I do not doubt that their hearts are in the right place – it’s more that 99% of them are completely disconnected from the actual process. Either their children are in the school of their choice, or if they didn’t get their choice then, sigh, off to Tower Hill. Those without children are full of theories with no skin in the game.
Actually, none of them have skin in the game. None of these people have faced, or will face, the reality of having their choice application (for public or charter school) denied and not being able to afford private school – which means their only option is sending their child to a failing feeder school (Warner, Glasgow, etc.) or a subpar charter school (Pencader, Moyer, etc.).
Choice only works if you actually have a choice – not if you have to choose.
It would be nice if the parents in CSW and NCS took a moment and consider what they would have done if their child didn’t get into those schools – or if those schools closed suddenly. If they could simply send their kids to private schools then… no skin in the game. But if they actually had to maneuver the existing system, I bet they’d expand their focus to improving all schools.
And here’s another thing to chew on… Charter advocates better pay attention. Charters aren’t the end goal. Charters are merely an expensive stepping stone whose days are numbered. Charters don’t fulfill the bottom line.
Vouchers are gaining steam – and this is where completely private corporations tap into all that taxpayer money with very few strings attached – and I’m sure they’ll get rid of those strings as well. It’s where charters become a place with children sitting in front of computers while
teachersmoderators oversee the “product”. It’s where private corporations are signing students up for educational courses with a FREE Tablet and pulling the funds to pay for these courses from school districts. Don’t believe me? It’s already happening.“That doesn’t particularly look like a stacked membership to me. ”
Really? No TPS parents? No representation from the districts most impacted, Red Clay and Christina?
DSEA should have been a voice against at least the most egregious provisions in the bill. But when DSEA emerged as supporters, then it became clear it was stacked. By rights DSEA support on this ought to set off a leadership struggle or at least some serious internal pressure.
Re secrecy: I think charter supporters were traumatized by the NCS hearings and didn’t want critics to show up. At the beginning I thought it was fair (but illegal) that they should conduct the meetings without a circus atmosphere.
Wait, so our tax dollars are going to pay for transportation for Charter School children, when I had to put tens of thousands of miles on my car and pay endless gas bills to choice my kid into elementary and middle schools that were in the same District? F*ck that.
I’ve had enough of Charter Schools, they are nothing more than a publicly funded private school. The “lottery” system that charter schools use is a joke. If the system were truly fair and it wasn’t a system where charter school board members get first dibs for their kids and siblings automatically get in, the schools would be more diverse. SAS is Sussex is easily over 95% white, while every public school in Sussex is very diverse. Again, f*ck that.
Fix the public schools, and stop funneling money away from them to fund white flight schools paid for with tax dollars.
Mike: Chill out, asshole. I asked a simple, logical question. If your FOIA request was rejected, then the next clear step is to appeal it to the AG. If you don’t, then stop whining and shut up. It costs nothing to do so – just send an email.
“Wait, so our tax dollars are going to pay for transportation for Charter School children, when I had to put tens of thousands of miles on my car and pay endless gas bills to choice my kid into elementary and middle schools that were in the same District? F*ck that.”
Yep. I wrote about this in my post yesterday. I said:
I’m still waiting for someone to explain this to me. As a choice parent, I’m all ears as to why public school choice students aren’t provided bus transportation, but charter school CHOICE students are.
Here’s where I’m ending up. Charter schools are private schools that exist, for a certain few, on the taxpayer dime. They require all sorts of special treatment in order to function – and over 80% perform worse than, or the same as, public schools. It’s past time to ask if charters are worth the expense.
“It’s past time to ask if charters are worth the expense.”
Whoa there, Pandora. Subtracting the expenses involved in building the school makes charters cheaper, not more expensive, that regular public schools. There are lots of reasons to oppose charters, but the cost isn’t one of them.
If you want to make Charter Schools even cheaper close them down and incorporate their curriculum, students and teachers into the nearest public school.
Still wouldn’t be cheaper. Building expenses and upkeep suck down more dollars than you think. In fact, the law as written says that charters are supposed to be first in line to re-utilize closed schools. Has never happened.
As noted before, there are many valid complaints about charters. Cost per student is not among them.
First, Geezer, go read Steve Newton’s post that shows the cost per student. You may want to start complaining a little.
Second, the movement’s afoot for capital funding for charters, so it looks like we’re heading towards that complaint, too.
And we’re adding (if passed) a 2-5 million charter school slush fund – which can be used for capital improvement/equipment.
And I’m kinda sad because you didn’t read my post from yesterday. 😉 I was quite clear that the charter mantra of “charters offer a better education for less money” has been tossed in the trash – by the charter community itself!
First, I never said a word about “better education.” That’s a legitimate complaint. Second, my “cost per student” includes rather than excludes capital costs. Yes, charter supporters are trying to eliminate that difference, at which point I will stop making the claim. Unless and until capital costs are borne by taxpayers, charter schools are cheaper, and Steve’s post makes that perfectly clear. His only complaint was that the funding difference per student (which does not including capital costs) is inconsistent and rarely reaches the $3,000 per student supporters claim. Yet it’s still cheaper for all except special-needs students, which should surprise exactly nobody; those students cost more no matter what schools they attend.
One more time: What I said is absolutely true, and the post you directed me to proves it. If you can’t read a simple post like Steve’s and look beyond the rhetoric to the actual numbers without misrepresenting them, why should I believe you on anything involved in the discussion?
Here’s the point: We shouldn’t be asking if “charter schools are worth the expense,” because the expense is less, not more.
The proper question is, “Should we save this money at the expense of a quality education?”
I said you might want to complain a little. However, anyone who resides in Kent County might want to complain more since Kent County School Districts spend less per pupil than their charter schools.
The biggest problem is dealing with all the myths – and that 3,000.00 figure gets tossed around all the time.
None of which obviates what I wrote.
The attack on charter schools should center on Newark Charter, an obvious white flight academy as odious as anything in Alabama or Mississippi. It should also center on the charter granted to the travesty of a school started by Theo Gregory, who could fuck up a two-car funeral and never should have been greenlighted by the state ed dept. — we clearly need higher standards for entry to the field. Those are two easy-to-understand elements that offend anyone who follows politics, and not just parents: People are using the law to re-segregate schools, and people are using political power to get favorable treatment.
We also need to clear up what a charter school can be. Charter of Wilmington should not be a charter — it should be a magnet school, as should others started to track students into other concentrated fields. Why do we need a school that focuses on business skills, or any other job skill? That’s the job of vo-tech education, not general education. Unless you’re talking about classes for advanced students, as at CSW, these schools have illegitimate aims.
The idea was that charters would offer different education methods, not different areas of interest. In short, the standards need to be tightened significantly.
Agreed. Guess I’ll have to scrap my idea for a knitting charter school.
Also, I’m all for the ultimate test. Let’s give a struggling public school to a charter. They can implement their educational methods, but they have to keep the kids. No counseling out. If they succeed without reshaping the existing population then we will have a success.
Amendment HA1 (Kowalko) removes charter slush fund from bill. I wonder if more amendments are coming?
Unfortunately I missed the hearing due to middle school graduation. Sometimes you have to choose what kind of parent involvement you can do.
HB 165 reported out of committee with 1 favorable, 6 on its merits. From the committee report:
I was at the House Ed Committee meeting. It turns out that Kim Williams tried to get into one of the working group meetings and when finally was invited and wanted to bring her District Board Chair, she was denied. Her point was that she was never updated on any of the progress of the group. They hid behind a non-formal status so are not subject to FOIA law and didn’t keep minutes.
When Williams called upon the House attorney for a legal opinion, the incredibly arrogant SOB that stood up told her to never mind what happened. What was past was done and it was a waste of time to revisit it. Legal or not?
Exhausting.
Congrats go to Williams, Baumbach (not a committee member but who brought 17 points of contention carried in four amendments), Kowalko, Osienski, Potter and Bolden who in combination, were able to put so much of question and concern on the table that the entire room started to reek.
Also, Jaques asserted that he and only he, with some help from Scott wrote the legislation (completely ignoring all the work he did with Kowalko). The working group didn’t set policy. It only discussed and recommended policy…..with stakeholders…..here and there. Jaques told Kowalko that he picked a few of John’s ideas and he picked up one idea from the May PDD meeting: to add lunch requirement.
The woman who had suggested that told me that she had sent him many emails asking him why the language was so weak and ambivalent and there was no breakfast requirement.
She said Jaques told her he would have to run it by the DE Charter School Network first.
So who wrote this bill, exactly, Earl? The language for that section and many, many of the other sections leave mac truck-sized holes and we know who’s driving through.
Also brought up time after time was the idea that charter buildings are privately held so when we start throwing major (or minor) capital tax payer funds at them, that is funding private corporations assets. A big difference. Other comparisons were made and it all goes to show that if the work group was actually OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, this kind of scrutiny and stating of the obvious would have prevented the mess and stench we have today in HB 165.
One more thought: why the slush fund and the bum rush through the legis? I say it is because the old-MBNA-BoA-now-Longwood building is taking charter tenants and they want the cash to renno. The elites that run in that crowd are driving this.
The slush fund wasn’t a lot of money but it puts the camel’s nose under the tent. Thanks for the first-person reporting, Nancy.
he old-MBNA-BoA-now-Longwood building is taking charter tenants and they want the cash to renno.
Kuumba is already in for fall 2013, and the deadline for the second cohort of applicants was last Monday for fall 2014 occupancy. Remember, occupants can be either new or existing charters, and a while back there was a hint maybe a Kipp school was coming.
BTW, total student seats for the building have been bumped up yet again, to 2800.
Great info, Nancy. Good to see so many D’s challenging the Markell Machine on this one. Better to have this legislation derailed than have a major train wreck a year from now.
I’m intrigued by the transportation slush fund… A few years ago the state changed the funding model for transportation from full funding to percentage-based. There was some about the governor seeing a few half-empty buses leaving a school, so he wanted the districts to have some skin in the game. Fine.
So now the districts have to get reimbursed for at something like $0.80 on the dollar. Even if a charter had reimbursement from the state, it would be on a percentage basis, rather than a lump-sum grant, right? If not, then I am calling a serious WTF on this.
And if you are getting 80% back from the state, THERE IS NO MONEY LEFT. You already spent that money (and 20% more), then we are just talking about cash-flow.
El Som,
Take the list linked by Mike O, and then put 100lbs over your left rear tire on your car for every person related to charters and the same for the right wheel for all the people with no connection to charters.
Next, start the car and turn left. Put in drive and hit the gas.
Enjoy your dizzying, left turn, perfect circle, as you advance nowhere, but spin endlessly.
On the transgender equality bill … so I’m confused by the story in the NJ today. The guy they interviewed doesn’t want his employer to know he’s trans – so he agrees to have his name used and photo published?
I’m really feeling like I’m missing something huge here. Huh?
I feel like I should be calling BS. A simple Google search turned up an article from 10 years ago where his gender identity is discussed and both his former and current names are used.
http://www.camprehoboth.com/letters/2003/may-16-2003-issue-index/may-16-2003-drag-kings.htm
I guess the exterminator company must not know how to use Google?