Live Blogging The Delaware House Session – Focus HB 165
Here we go – well, it will probably be a while!
Here’s the link to listen to the live-stream of the Delaware House. They’re recessed now (3pm). Anyone know what time they’ll start up again?
Mike Matthews is live tweeting the session. Follow him @dwablog Use #hb165
Meanwhile… Mike O. of the Seventh Type, via commenter Citizen, brings us this: Michael D. Thomas, Ed. D. President, Delaware Chief School Officers Association opposes HB 165. Go read the letter!
Use this thread to keep us informed.
Tags: Charter Schools, Education, HB 165
I think this is going to be a long recess. I think this charter bill is causing some major divisions in caucus. Could be a while.
At least I’m near an outlet and have an awesome WiFi signal! Can someone deliver me a Dunkin’ iced coffee?
Jaques told Mike M. that there are 11 Amendments. I guess they are reviewing them now privately.
Yeah…only the first amendment is up on the website. I look forward to (quickly) viewing the rest as they come up for debate and vote on the floor.
One of the interesting things Jaques told us at the May PDD meeting was that the working group had an agreed process where they reviewed ideas and only those that reached a consensus were added to the list of recommendations.
Jaques said that the up-to-$5 million Charter Performance Fund, to be controlled by DDOE, was NOT placed on the list with consensus. The fund ended up on the list despite NOT being supported by the working group.
I would love to hear how that broke down supporters- non-supporters.
Jaques said he was surprised that Kendall Massett agreed to his idea for the impact assessment. Too bad it is so watered down if that was the main concession he got.
Mike, the amendments might be already drawn up. You can check in the basement file room – down past the JFC meeting room.
On the impact assessment issue, here’s where DOE and DSEA were last August, from a piece on WDDE/Delaware First Media. (References are to Dan Cruce, former #2 at DOE, and Fredrika Jenner, DSEA president) After reading this, you can’t be surprised at what wound up in the legislation:
Cruce supports the idea of impact statements, but said they should be focused on “the educational impact on the kids, not on the adults who are in the geographic area.”
While Jenner believes that charter school authorizers, like the State Board of Education in Delaware, should have discretion to consider community impact, Cruce said it would be “bad procedure and bad policy” to deny a charter application solely because it would draw students (and funding) away from a nearby traditional public school.
Still in recess…
Did you find something to eat, Mike?
Christmas–wish I could be at this one. I need to see amendments, but it should really be a scratch. HB 165 as written will end up as the IRS Tax Code by the time they get the MANY amendments necessary to get this anywhere to what a free public school education is supposed to look like in this nation.
Cheetos and gummi bears, pandora! :-/
And amen, Joanne!
I hope we aren’t headed to a midnight passage after everyone else has gone to bed. That would be the next unsavory trick to pull out of the bag.
Nothing like running this on the same PM most school boards meet. As if Chiefs and board members don’t have to be elsewhere w/ a standing commitment, AND all the prep work for that PM meeting.
They may be negotiating some sort of deal where proponents will agree to add certain amendments and the roadblock to consideration of the bill can be broken.
Or…they may be screaming at each other.
thanks, folks, in Dover, who are able to live blog this. I will be heading into CSD for a board meeting shortly and plan to keep an active eye here to see what develops occur. You know those CSD meetings – they can go as late as the legislative session…
Anyway, thank you.
Amendments 2-11 are now posted on the Legislative website under HB 165.
Here’s the link to those amendments. Start reading everyone!
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/LIS147.nsf/vwLegislation/HB+165?Opendocument
http://www.legis.delaware.gov/LIS/LIS147.NSF/vwLegislation/HB+165?Opendocument
Here’s the 1st one:
Here’s the 2nd:
Oh wow! Check this one out!
Aaaaaanddddd we’re back!
Getting mixed signals. I’m told the dem caucus was a shitshow on this bill, but they will be running it tonight.
if we’d legalized pot last legislative session, they’d be back by now… 🙁
BREAKING: From what I’ve been told #hb165 has the votes to pass. Without the amendments. Not good at all. I have a very good source.
Baumbach’s amendments are very good (also Kowalko’s, which has been posted since the hearing). If our House votes them down, at least the reps will have been forced to show their true colors, as pawns of a governing & social elite. Maybe they’ll turn out to be better than that! Cross fingers, pray…
Read ’em quick and dirty. Good start–but there should be MORE. Transportation parameters MUST be tightened. Even vo-techs use a county line. If you acquire/rent/lease/buy a building not meeting what a TPS has to undertake for eligibility to function–no minor cap for you. And definitely, no minor cap to bring you into Code. So everything from traffic patterns, to acreage criteria—and the forgiveness of that and everything in between–to fast track your building opening should eliminate you from the minor cap draw as a given.
And whatever magic bullet is bringing them success as is proclaimed, needs to be officially reported out and SHARED w/ TPS as the original intent of legislation. (cough, cough)
That or TPS should be permitted to include DCAS or whatever scores in their district’s aggregate report of school district statistics, from where the student is domiciled, as to not create this havoc and nasty promulgation of bad, district schools—ruining neighborhoods and this state into something unfit and undesirable to move or live here. Because face it–the parents pick the school–but they may still be stuck with their neighborhood!!!!!
BTW, it appears that this is the Officially Blessed Amendment for HB 165:
http://www.legis.delaware.gov/LIS/lis147.nsf/vwLegislation/HA+3+to+HB+165?opendocument
It restores breakfast for those who qualify under the federal program.
The cynic in me suggests that this was restored to keep the wired Wilmington delegation wired.
From last week’s committee questions, the Wilmington Delegation is just as worried about TPS capacity and sustainability, minor cap. to private buildings, etc. The CPF impact on money available to districts.
It’s going to pass. Time to turn attention to the Senate.
Matthews will track who voted for which amendment. The Senate DEMs also in the bag for Markell and GOPers for Charlie Copeland. Will some of these amendments get through?
Baumbach and Heffernan have competing amendments for replacing line 82.
HA 9 to HB 165 – PWB by Baumbach
AMEND House Bill No. 165 by striking line 82 in its entirety and substituting in lieu thereof the following: developed high-quality plans to serve a high proportion of traditionally under-served students including students with low socio-economic status (SES) and students with disabilities.
SYNOPSIS
The amendment requires that the high-quality plans for the receipt of funds directly serve traditionally under-served students.
HA 11 to HB 165 – PWB by Heffernan
AMEND House Bill No. 165 by striking line 82 in its entirety and substituting in lieu thereof the following: developed high-quality plans to serve a high proportion of traditionally under-served students including students with low socio-economic status (SES), rural students, and students with disabilities, with those schools receiving at least 50% of the performance fund.
SYNOPSIS
The amendment requires that preference is given to high-quality plans directly serving traditionally under-served students, rural students, or students with disabilities. Those programs are to receive at least 50% of the fund.
Joanne, Mike O. compiled the charter school data. Check it out.
There is no magic bullet – it’s all propaganda. Charters’ DCAS (or whatever) scores wouldn’t improve public schools’ scores – they may lower them.
It’s up now, go to http://legis.delaware.gov/ to listen in.
Yep, it’s on!
HA 1 to HA 165 (Kowalko) – fails.
Big fail. It’s over. Maybe some day we’ll find out the real story behind the story.
I’m sticking with Markell, Race to the Top, and his own exalted view of his political future.
If screwing public school kids helps his aspirations for higher office, then screwed those kids will be.
If this HB 165 passes it will be law that charters get up to 5 million every year?
The story can be found on the blogs over the years. It’s corporations tapping into tax dollars with union busting as the cherry on top.
quick smart phone guide to synopsis of all the amendments….
HA 2 to HB 165 (Kowalko) – failed.
HA 3 to HB 165 – (Jacques) – Had to hit the bathroom, assuming it passed.
It did pass, anon.
HA 4 to HB 165 (Baumbach) – Sibling bill – Jacques says “unfriendly” – Keeley wants this passed – JJ supports it – Potter supports it –
Thanks, pan, small bladder, big coffee.
Who are the nine consistent ones?
Here are the 9: Baumbach, Bennett, Bolden, J.Johnson, Keeley, Kowalko, Osienski, Potter, K. Williams.
Think that’s correct.
HA 4 to HB 165 – (Baumbach) – students “locked out” because siblings automatically get in, premise was ease in driving – fails
Newark Charter School is now a legacy school.
ok. thanks.
HA 5 to HB 165 (Baumbach (so you know it’s good)) – Keeley supports this says Charter Schools are discriminating against CoWilm students based upon mileage.
Keeley says if any this is the one we need to pass.
JJ backs Keeley – City of Wilmington students are being discriminated against – Kowalko supports – Kowalko wants accessability
John Viola voted with his daughter on #4 – that made 10 – 30 – 1.
Jaques is saying that all amendments having to do with demographics will be taken up in the task force outlined in HB 90 due in January.
Challenges to Jaques, who calls the amendment unfriendly, that there is no guarantee that the task force will discuss any of the items in these amendments he is trashing.
So glad Keeley is standing with her city Reps. on this. Heffernan is a yes.
Mulrooney is a yes but was a yes for the last amendment and changed his vote to no once it had already failed. 15 yes. 24 no. Atkins absent.
Roll call HA 5 to HB 165 fails
I’m out. Too depressing. But I have a new appreciation for Reps. Osienski, Kowalko, K. Williams, Keeley and Baumbach.
Scott is pulling a trick to characterize a reflection of staff and admin turnover as micromanagement. After seeing Pencader turnover……one would think…..
Minor Cap. limit called unfriendly by Scott. Private Corporation ok to suck up state tax money to fix what private landlords of owners are responsible for ‘in the real world’.
Here then is who we hit hard in 2014… it will be very rough for them to get one public school’s parent;s vote…. (remember DeLuca? No, who’s he?..)
Michael A. Barbieri
Gerald L. Brady
Debra J. Heffernan
Earl G. Jaques Jr
S. Quinton Johnson
Valerie Longhurst
Michael P. Mulrooney
Darryl M. Scott
Bryon H. Short
Melanie George Smith
John J. Viola
Rebecca Walker
Dennis E. Williams
That’s 14. who will have a much rougher time…
Kavips, Bolden has supported all of the amendments, hasn’t she?
Wow. Did anyone understand a word Sec Murphy said?
Amendment 8 fails.
Shite. Heffernan strikes her amendment. WTF? Baumbach struck 12 and 13 because it was addressed in #3.
There will be some fat purses going to these boot-licking politicians and their party coffers this year as a reward for this slick shit.
Now Jaques is thumping his chest again and once more giving only Darryl Scott credit for ‘writing’ the bill.
FYI, I edited Kavips list above (with his permission). Stephanie Bolden voted for the amendments.
I’ll say it again…the fact that someone doesn’t support you on one issue doesn’t, at least for me, mean that you oppose them. The converse is also true.
Barbieri and Smith are solid legislators. Potter, who has supported the amendments to THIS bill, has made a slew of head-shaking votes. He’d be my #1 target.
Sometimes, people do the right thing for the wrong reasons, and vice versa.
Now, Gerald Brady and Val Longhurst, I’d have no problems challenging them both.
My bad on Boulden .. She’s a hero…
I got video of Sec. Murphy admitting that charter school applications don’t have to include proposed location of the school. So how can an accurate impact study be done? Hot. Mess.
Everyone does know that if this bill becomes law capital funding for charter schools becomes law… and the 5 million slush fund will look like peanuts in 10 years.
Boom! Charter School Network guy, Jim Taylor, is asked if they will ask for additional capital funding in the future.
He refuses to give a yes or no answer.
Shoot. I don’t think I’ve ever been proved right this quickly.
This has been some stellar blogging all around, even if the outcome appears not to our liking. And Baumbach and Kowalko and K. Williams deserve awards for standing up.
El.. what you say is true… Take Melanie for example.
Good votes
However there is a time when one’s loyalty to one’s party, gets in the way of one’s constituents. This is one of those times. What we are witnessing is allegiance to Markell., nothing more, nothing less. It is a “remember me for this deed I’ve done” type thing…
It may be a safe bet because the Republicans instead of joining the 9 to stymie the Gov, are with him. What a lost political opportunity. .
Still, it is always good when the people in a community put heat on their legislators, saying in an effective way…”hey, remember me? I live over here, in your district; you work for me, right?” Such lessons if they don’t cost one an office, at least guarantee that their constituents needs are considered first, before the governor asks for another favor…
That is the lesson that must be taught… That is the lesson Deluca learned too late.
if this passes then I want a bill that requires a 10 to 1 ratio (Public v. Charter) in capital funding.
An impact study makes more sense upon renewal than upon initial approval.
HB165 passes
Now the effort for charter reform begins, from a little further back this time.
JJ Johnson is reminding everyone that money drain from TSP to Charters was first raised by Hudson in 2006.
Also then a DE Charter School report said they might be speeding up reseg based on race, class and ability. The study was done by Western Michigan University on in our then 13 charters.
Johnson was on a Wilmington Education Task Force with Joe Miro in 2008 that found that there many troubling issues based on Wilmington schools and surrounding NCC. The task force made recommendations to the Assembly. Nothing came of it.
Then in 2010, there were meetings with Markell and black leadership: a coalition including the Black Caucus and NAACP. And that discussion has led nowhere.
Johnson sees this bill as further resegregate our schools.
Kowalko reminds the Chamber that he represents the tax payer, local districts and 120 thousand kids in the TPS. He reads the Chief Schools Assn. position. Mentions the lack of transparency in forming the legislation and asks for delay until the second task force reports.
Keeley asks for witness from Charter School Network for a question. Their lawyer stands. Vision in later years to ask for more money for capital funds? Can’t say. This is the deal so no plans to come back for more. Yes or No?
She wants it on the record. In 1997 with Hudson heard the Charter Network said they would never come back and ask for more money for capital funding.
Carson asks Jaques to list the supporting groups for the bill who were on the Working Group.
Bennett wants to delay the bill. It is a better bad bill.
Jaques clarify that the lawyer did not answer Keeley yes or no because who knows what the future holds.
Baumbach – the lawyer said – this is a culmination of a lot of hard work on the bill.
This was not a bill that was inclusive. Many were not heard who deserve to be heard. This is rushed. Two weeks filed. Funded before it was filed. Big dollars but why rushing? Wonders why the GOP legis is so happy with this. Move and second to table fails.
Melanie Smith recalls the Charter School witness. Jim Taylor is asked if he was authorized to speak. No.
Potter – I have a list of non -supporters who were not at the table. Not invited. He is worried that we are pushing Charters ahead of TSP?
Roll call – Kim Williams will be making a statement after the vote. Good on ya all who tried to make this a better bill today.
Kim says that there is no point to say anything now. It would have been nice if allowed to do so before the vote. Schwartzkopf refused to let her touch on the FOIA problem because it wasn’t in direct reference to HB 165
Mike M. “I got video of Sec. Murphy admitting that charter school applications don’t have to include proposed location of the school. So how can an accurate impact study be done? Hot. Mess.”
I will look for it on YouTube!
For the record because I’m having connection problems, did Rep Joe Miro vote with the GOP for this bill?
I was listening to the audio stream and I had Miro as a Yes.
Matthews has the roll call video on YouTube but the acoustics are a little iffy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uYCxeiZi3Y&feature=youtu.be&a
Another bad bill makes it through the House, what are the numbers looking like in the Senate, all Republicans will vote yes like robots.
Nancy, Here’s Mike’s video of Sec. Murphy.
When questioned on impact, I think he said he’s for
good and bad impact. Um… okay.
Jaques’ statement:
I would like the AG to continue the FOIA Investigation if it names the people who are dirty. None of this “violations were committed” stuff.
I’m not going to speak for Mike Barbieri, but, he does NOT vote to please Jack Markell or any other politician. I disagree with him on this one but I know he puts a lot of thought and study into his decisions. If you want to know why he voted the way he did, call him. He’ll tell you.
NOW do the districts and DSEA hear the wakeup call?
This bill is by no means perfect, but if all interested parties dug their heels in and held out for 100 percent of what they wanted, nothing would have gotten done.
That, of course, would have been the preferred outcome, Earl.
Democrats have to stop giving quarter to those who deliberately seek to widen the chasm of inequity that has become our public schools, IMO.
What amazes me is how easily DSEA and PTA were co-opted by charter lobbyists. They should have been the foremost defenders of public schools. You know, it would be a lot easier for public school advocates to take officerships in those organizations than a seat in the GA. Hmmmm…
A lot of public school advocates have been disaffected to those two organizations, mike.
E
Sad outcome, but it’s not over yet. On to the senate–get everyone you know who might possibly be concerned about the implications of this bill to call their senator tomorrow. There are MANY more Delawareans harmed by this bill than helped, as it stands.
Thanks for all the great blogging and tweets. As a supposed democracy with a thoroughly dysfunctional “paper of record,” we desperately need the blogs!
El Som makes an interesting point: I’ll say it again…the fact that someone doesn’t support you on one issue doesn’t, at least for me, mean that you oppose them. The converse is also true.
But I would add this caveat: there are certain issues that are so defining that they do function that way. Public education is, at least to me, such an issue.
mike o. says: What amazes me is how easily DSEA and PTA were co-opted by charter lobbyists. They should have been the foremost defenders of public schools.
With respect to DSEA I’ve been pretty clear on where I think the fault lies: why anyone thinks that Frederika Jenner is still representing the interest of teachers or the teachers’ union is beyond me.
With respect to the Delaware PTA it is pretty difficult to be objective when you’re also a PR person for a new charter school:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/yvonne-johnson/4/a01/a3
Ugh. Bummer. Thank you all for the coverage and commentary. Have to call my rep again and question his reasoning, as he’s on the naughty list…already contacted my Senator yesterday. Will try again in the morning. But not sure I am optimistic overall. 🙁
As for the DSEA & PTA comments…I don’t think I’d need both hands to count the parents and teachers at my child’s school that feel our interests are being paid attention to, let alone supported or defended, by those bodies on any topic in any venue.
Per Jaques–“this bill is a great example of compromise……” R U kidding me? With who(m)? Yeh—you compromised free public education for the majority of students within the state boundaries of Delaware.
Game changer for those that don’t think this isn’t strong armed muscle bound gubernatorial bullying:
A Retraction from the Superintendents! Honestly, we all just deserve what we get with lilly-livered shit like this coming from the school chiefs.
> From: Thomas Michael
> Date: June 11, 2013, 3:51:08 PM EDT
> To: McDowell Harris , Henry Margaret Rose , Marshall Robert , Lavelle Greg , Cloutier Catherine , Lopez Ernesto B , Blevins Patricia , Sokola David , Peterson Karen , Hall-Long Bethany , Townsend Bryan , Poore Nicole , McBride David , Ennis Bruce , “Lawson Dave” , “senator-colin@prodigy.net” , Bushweller Brian , “gsimpson@udel.edu” , Pettyjohn Brian , Hocker Gerald , Venables Robert
> Subject: HB 165 Charter Legislation
>
> Dear Legislator:
>
>
>
> I forwarded to you earlier today concerns and subsequent position of the School Chiefs regarding House Bill 165. This bill possesses some components which address concerns regarding the current legislation and regulation of charter schools. Some of these components will serve to produce better clarity and accountability for the development and operation of charter schools. The particular issues that were defined in my earlier email were:
>
>
>
> 1. The $2 million performance fund
>
> 2. DOE authority to transfer funds from public school districts to charter schools
>
> 3. The extension of a renewal term for a charter school for ten years
>
>
>
> In voicing these concerns, this was not to assert that the bill is without merit, but was to emphasize the concern of the School Chiefs on the matters cited above. Certainly we believe parts of the bill are a step forward and hopefully can be a platform for subsequent changes in the future. Further, we believe the establishment of the proposed task force can address not only concerns with admission preferences, but also a number of other critical items that deserve consideration. There has been a commitment provided and reinforced in conversation today that the matters cited above will be looked at in a critical analysis along with the impact on a community and its public schools for future charter approvals. Therefore, based on these conversations and commitments, the School Chiefs Association will support the charter legislation and work diligently with appropriate agency designees for continued improvements and refinements.
>
>
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
>
>
> Michael D. Thomas, Ed. D.
>
> President, Delaware Chief School Officers Association
>
>
So DE PTA President shifts to the category of people on the Working Group who make money directly from the results of the Work Group product……Can’t wait to see who our freaking HIGH DEM leadership appoints to the next task force….
The News Journal does have an article today about the FOIA issue but they did refuse to publish many editorial page letters in opposition to HB 165 (via Citizen)
I don’t know what is wrong with comments but I would like at least one of the last two lifted out of spam.
Here is the News Journal’s coverage of the FOIA problem
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130611/NEWS03/130611005/Attorney-General-s-Office-Charter-group-may-violated-law-meetings
I am not sure why the comment got flagged, Nancy. I have released them.
We need to make sure the HB 90 task force meetings are open and published in advance, and then blog the hell out of it. In a way it doesn’t matter who is on the committee as long as we cover it.
Of course then they will just find another back room to make their deals.
Take it easy on the Thomas and the supers until we figure out what is going on and just what kind of club was held over their heads.
Re: NewsJrnl and lack of editorial page coverage–according to Connie Merlet, she & Jn Kowalko know of at least a dozen letters that were sent to the paper last wk. (in addition to mine) detailing problems with this bill and, thus, reasons to call reps. and demand a “no” vote or at least amendments. I was copied on a few of these, from district schl parents praising their kids’ schls and asking that charters not be favored to the detriment of those schls. I also saw her Voices column draft, which she asked about space for in advance and was told would likely go in early this week.
Not like writing these things and getting them down to the word limit takes time or anything. What a waste. Anyone know whether the Ed. Pg. editor has kids or grandkids, and where they go to schl.? At this point, seems like one always needs to examine that, in DE. Talk about a divisive system!
John K/Paul B
If you could let us know what went on inside last night’s caucus, it could help.
I was told it was all out chaos, Kavips. One member told me she tried to table the bill twice, saying there is just too much up in the air and that more discussion needs to be had. She was denied.
NJ editorial page editor has two sons. Both are graduates of CSW. ‘Nuff said.
I listened to the live audio, and am I crazy or did I hear a legislator, Potter perhaps, say that charter schools performed better than public schools? This was near the end of the debate and was in the context of the performance fund, and he actually was speaking in opposition to the bill.
Thanks, mediawatch. I could have guessed. This is a real problem–various people whom one might expect to be allies, at least of reasoned debate, have been co-opted by DE’s schooling inequities of the past decade. That will take a while to undo.