Course reversed: Another twist for 'school choice' bill

Mon, 03/31/2008 - 2:31pm
By: John Munford

Change would forbid Clayton students from transferring to any public school ; vote expected Tuesday on House floor

If local legislators have their way Tuesday (April 1), Fayette County public schools won’t be forced to accept students from Clayton County should the district lose its accreditation as expected this fall.

A proposed amendment to Senate Bill 458 would forbid Clayton’s students from transferring to any public school systems outside their county, said Sen. Ronnie Chance (R-Tyrone). Instead the bill would only allow them to transfer to any private school.

The bill is due for debate on the House floor sometime Tuesday, and because of a technicality the only amendment that can be accepted to the bill is the one Chance is advocating, which would allow students from a de-accredited county to seek a state-paid voucher for private schools only.

Ramsey said Monday afternoon that he’s optimistic the amendment will be accepted. He added that the bill's previous requirement, adopted by the Senate after the initial bill was passed by the Senate, has been changed by removing the word "shall" and replacing it with the word "may" in reference to whether school systems could decide to accept students from de-accredited schools in another county.

Ramsey said public schools “never should have been part of the equation” of the bill. He added that language in the bill allows a student to transfer from one public school to another school as long as the accepting school is within the same school system. That would address problems if one particular school, and not the whole school system, lost its accreditation, Ramsey said.

The bill’s current language drew a firestorm of criticism last week, with more than 15,000 phone calls to the Capitol and more than 1,500 emails reaching Ramsey himself last week in opposition to the bill. Opponents worried that the bill would require Fayette and other school districts to host an unlimited amount of students from Clayton County, which has more than 53,000 students currently enrolled.

Sen. Valencia Seay (D-Riverdale), who represents part of northeast Fayette County, and much of west Clayton County, said she prefers a different solution entirely to Clayton’s pending school crisis. She wants to create an option for a “unified school district” in which Clayton County students could remain at their current schools, which would be operated by other school districts under contracts until the Clayton County School Board can regain accreditation.

Seay, who supported the initial amendment to SB 458 that would have forced other school systems to accept student transfers from districts that lose accreditation, said she was merely “trying to make a bad bill better.”

Seay added that she was elected to represent “all the students,” and she felt allowing all students to attend their same school is the best idea.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by boxwing on Mon, 03/31/2008 - 5:17pm.

The House Science & Technology Committee passed the bill out to the full house with the following wording:

"Request a transfer for the student to a public school outside of the student´s resident school system which has available space and transport such student. The public school system may accept the student, and if it does, such system shall report the student for purposes of funding to the department"

I'm no lawyer, but this wording is still very ambiguous. I take it that any Clayton family could file a request with the FCBOE and then the FCBOE must first declare if space was available. This step alone could result in legal action if the requestor does not agree with the FCBOE finding.

Then we have the issue of the term "transport such student". Does this mean that the FCBOE would be forced to provide transport or is this an additional condition in that the FCBOE would declare if they had transport available? This section is very muddled and would end up in court.

Finally the language says "the public school system may accept the student"; it does not say may or MAY NOT accept the student. Does the FCBOE have to show cause other than the conditions mentioned earlier in the text to not accept a student? This is unclear as well and will end up in court.

So unless the entire text quoted above is stricken in its entirety, we are in for a long series of court cases that allow the courts to legislate from the bench as to the "real" meaning of this bill.

Submitted by boxwing on Tue, 04/01/2008 - 1:07pm.

It is important to remember that current state law allows schools to admit or deny students from other jurisdictions at their own discretation. The practice is prevalent in rural communities and was allowed in Fayette County until the early 80s and the beginning of our explosive growth. Thankfully, our current school board maintains a very strict residency requirement, as has been the county policy for 25 years. The importance of switching "shall" back to "may" in the House makes sure school systems' current legal ability to deny out of jurisdiction students is not affected. It is settled law that schools never must accept students from other jurisdictions. By removing "shall" for "may" the discretion will remain with the school board, as it should.

Matt Ramsey

and my counterpoint back to him:

Rep. Ramsey:

I appreciate your timely response, but I still respectfully disagree with your position. While it might be “settled law that schools never must accept students from other jurisdictions”, the passage of a new law opens the door to further attempts to divine the true meaning of the law and its relationship to existing “settled law”. Simply saying “may” versus “shall” will forestall any legal actions by individuals against the FCBOE is optimistic and most likely wrong.

SB 458 is a very poor attempt to institutionalize the concept of vouchers for private school use and will in the long run do more harm than good. It is bad policy and ultimately bad politics.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Mon, 03/31/2008 - 4:57pm.

“trying to make a bad bill better.”

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.


Submitted by AllKnowing on Mon, 03/31/2008 - 5:13pm.

How about making a bad legislator better. Sen. Seay does not represent Fayette County any way at all.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.