A hearing was held today on SB 107 in the House Education Committee. This bill would allow three elementary-only school districts to take control over high school education of their students. The hearing was a battle between these three school districts and the three larger school districts that would lose high school students.
The proponents of the bill pointed out that this bill will give these communities local control over the education of their students. They are worried about the drop out rates of their students in the larger school districts.
The opponents are worried about the loss of specialized programs that likely happen and the higher costs that these districts would have to absorb. They also think that many lawsuits will be filed over transfer of property.
School District 2 (Billings Public Schools) had 4 administrators testifying at the hearing including Superintendent Bouck. They complained that they would have to cut (and even eliminate) AP classes, electives, and programs. These are all highly paid people and I think they can figure out a way to preserve these programs with 500 less students. BPS is the largest school district in the state, so a small loss of students will not impact these programs. It may even open up slots to students vacated by Lockwood students.
BPS also claims that this is a cut in funding for Billings students. Yes, BPS will see a cut in funding, because they are educating 500 less students. The per student funding from the state will increase, because 500 students funded at the lowest level will be leaving the district. In terms of per student funding, this is a win/win for students of both school districts. Yes some teachers in BPS will lose their jobs, but they can find jobs in the new Lockwood high school.
Representative Essmann asked some good questions for Billings taxpayers. The tax base for BPS would drop 9%, but they will not need that tax base because they are losing 500 students. There is a 3 year transition period where Billings taxpayers must pay for students that do not exist. 100% for year one, 67% in year two, and 33% in year three. That is 4.1 mils for year one if you want to calculate your personal cost. At the end, a 1 mil increase remains. This is at most less then $10 on most annual residential property tax bills.
Representative Essmann thought that there needed to be more time for the transition. My opinion is parents not served well by BPS should get this issue resolved as fast as possible. Why delay getting these students a better education? The Lockwood community has fought this battle for years under the current system with BPS not addressing the issues. It is unfair to them to drag this out longer than it should be.
There will likely be amendments added to this bill during executive action to clarify things.
In the end, let us remind ourselves why this bill exists. Billings Public Schools is not meeting the needs of Lockwood parents to the levels they have learned to expect while their kids were in Lockwood Public Schools K-8. Lockwood students go into high school further ahead in their education than Billings students. (standardized test scores back this up) This is problematic. Does BPS put Lockwood students in their own classes, so they can pick up where they left off? I doubt it.
Proponents of SB107 should drop the drop-out argument. Superintendent Bouck blew the drop-out argument out of the water at the hearing. Records show that most all of the Lockwood students that dropped out had attendance issues while they were in Lockwood Schools K-8. The Superintendent could be lying, but that is highly unlikely. Students that drop-out usually do have issues that have roots in elementary schools. So proponents should look at the Lockwood student body as a whole, where the numbers favor their position.
Virgil
No comments:
Post a Comment