SHES - 3/8/95 SB 88 PILOT PROGRAM FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS  Number 003 CHAIRMAN GREEN called the Senate Health, Education and Social Services (HESS) Committee to order at 9:07 a.m. and noted that at 10:00 a.m. there would be a presentation by the Department of Health & Social Services. She introduced SB 88 as the first order of business before the committee. SENATOR MILLER moved to adopt the Ford 3/7/95, version F, CS of SB 88 in lieu of the original bill. Hearing no objections, it was adopted. SENATOR SHARP, prime sponsor, reviewed the changes which had been incorporated in the CS. SENATOR ELLIS asked if the added language regarding operating within a public school district meant that all charter schools under SB 88 would be creations within the public school system. SENATOR SHARP clarified that a proposal for a charter school must be approved by the local school board and the commissioner of education. The charter school would operate under the guidelines of the school districts. Number 106 SENATOR ELLIS asked if charter schools would be public or semi- private schools. SENATOR SHARP said that SB 88 intended for charter schools to be a form of public schools which have a different focus or goal. The charter school would be funded by the public and overseen by the local school board. SENATOR SALO expressed concern with the type of discrimination that may be allowed with the students of a charter school. Another concern is regarding a teacher giving up their contractual rights in the school district in order to teach at a charter school. SENATOR SHARP understood that existing contractual rights would be honored for all personnel who transfer to a charter school. In response to Senator Salo, Senator Sharp did not foresee how discrimination could occur unless those applying happened to be skewed to a certain group. He stated that SB 88 specifies that any children could apply to a charter school and if there were too many applicants then lots would be drawn. SENATOR SALO clarified her concern regarding the possibility that a child could be discriminated against, denied admission, if they were a low academic student. SENATOR SHARP did not think so. The school board would have to approve the methods of the charter school. He noted the possibility of problems with busing which the school board would also have to address. Number 171 SENATOR ELLIS thought that SB 88 would utilize academic discrimination; a student would have to perform to a certain degree on an aptitude test in order to be accepted into the charter school. SENATOR SHARP said that SB 88 does not provide for the super selection of students for charter schools unless the school board or commissioner of education approve such selection standards. Senator Sharp did not foresee their approval of such. SENATOR ELLIS clarified that if a local board of education and the commissioner of education approved that a certain score on an aptitude test would for be allowable for admission requirements then it would be as such. SENATOR SHARP agreed. CHAIRMAN GREEN asked if SB 88 was designed after other programs in other states. SENATOR SHARP said yes, the primary example used for this legislation was the program in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Number 231 CLAUDIA DOUGLAS, President of NEA-AK, stated that NEA-AK supports the concept of charter schools, however, there are concerns that charter schools could undermine education by allowing unprepared individuals to start schools. She pointed out that charter school plans must meet the following conditions: (1) no negative effect on the regular school program, (2) no diversion of current funds from public schools, (3) voluntary staff and student assignment to charter schools, (4) direct involvement of all effected school employees in the charter schools design, implementation and government, (5) adequate defense in regards to contract and employment provisions for all employees, (6) appropriate procedures for assessment and evaluation at predetermined periods within the term of the charter, (7) licensed professional staff, (8) health and safety standards for all students and employees, (9) non discrimination and equal educational opportunities, (10) adequate defenses ensuring physical accountability, (11) adequate and equitable funding, including start up money, (12) equitable procedures regarding student admission and retention, and (13) appropriate safeguards against racial and ethnic segregation. Ms. Douglas felt that SB 88 does address many of the concerns of NEA-AK. She suggested adding the language, "may not discriminate as based on AS 14.18 which relates to the basis of intelligence, achievement, aptitude or athletic ability." Every child should become a part of the classroom, the concept of inclusion. She did not believe that SB 88 addressed the exclusion of students who may be disabled. Section 5 poses another concern because with regard to transfers, evaluations, and negotiated agreements only teachers are addressed not all the other school employees. CHAIRMAN GREEN pointed out that subsection (b) of the CS may address that concern. CLAUDIA DOUGLAS suggested that the title of Section 5 seems misleading and perhaps, the word employee should be used instead of teacher. Ms. Douglas noted the need for start up money for charter schools. Number 311 SENATOR MILLER noted that the recommendation by NEA-AK to change "faculty" to "teacher" on line 2, page 2 was encompassed in the CS. He felt that administrators should also be a part of the academic policy committee; the CS does not allow any freedom to add principals or administrators to this committee. CLAUDIA DOUGLAS clarified that the recommendation from NEA-AK was to replace "faculty" with "school employees" due to the lack of a definition for "faculty." She agreed that administrators should also be on the academic policy committee. There would be no problem with adding language which would include administrators. SENATOR MILLER moved that on page 2, line 2, after the word "teachers" the words ", school employees" be inserted. Without objection, the amendment, Amendment 1, was adopted. SENATOR LEMAN suggested that the parents be listed first and then the previous amendment. SENATOR MILLER moved that CS SB 88(HES) as amended be moved out of committee with individual recommendations. Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.