---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Fifty-first Legislature –Second Regular Session
Minutes of Meeting
House Hearing Room 3 -- 2:00 p.m.
Vice-Chairman Coleman called the meeting to order at 3:52 p.m. and attendance was noted by the secretary.
|
Mr. Allen |
Mr. Meyer |
Mr. Coleman, Vice-Chairman |
|
Mr. Boyer |
Ms. Otondo |
Mrs. Goodale, Chairman |
|
Mrs. Carter |
Mr. Pierce J |
|
|
Ms. Miranda |
|
|
|
SB1092 – DP (5-3-0-1) |
SB1336 – DP (7-0-0-2) |
|
SB1102 – DP (7-0-0-2) |
SB1350 – DP (8-0-0-1) |
|
SB1182 – DPA (6-2-0-1) |
SB1391 – DPA S/E (7-0-0-2) |
|
SB1237 – DPA (7-1-0-1) on reconsideration |
SB1393 – DPA (4-3-0-2) |
Mrs. Carter introduced and welcomed Jordan Garcia from Deer Valley High School who has a strong passion for politics and good public policy.
CONSIDERATION OF BILLS
SB1182 – school district overrides; bonds; information – DO PASS AMENDED
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1182 do pass.
Aaron Wonders, Majority Research Analyst, explained that SB1182 requires purpose statements in bond and override election informational pamphlets to present factual information in a neutral manner and limits advocacy to the argument section (Attachment 1). The Coleman four-line amendment to SB1182 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 2) removes the provision modifying the type of property that the tax rate and override election informational pamphlet is based on and reverts to current law so the tax rate is based on a single family home valued at $80,000.
Kevin McCarthy, Arizona Tax Research Association (ATRA), spoke in favor of SB1182 with the Coleman amendment. He related that the main part of the bill deals with a growing problem that could lead to unnecessary litigation. More and more publicity pamphlets, which local governments are required to send for bond and override elections explaining the purpose for which the request has been made, include advocacy in the purpose statement. SB1182 is the result of considerable dialogue between local governments and school districts to provide clarity that the purpose statement is supposed to be neutral and advocacy is appropriate in the argument section.
In response to questions, Mr. McCarthy related that if a school district explains what the money will be used for, it is not considered advocacy. The bill originally limited the number of times a school district can have an override, which was removed in the Senate.
Doreen Zannis, representing self, opposed SB1182. She stated that as an average citizen and a parent in a school district, it is difficult to understand what the school district is asking for and why because of the restricted language. If the school districts cannot explain what will be done, she is not sure who else is better capable of doing so.
Names of persons who signed up in favor of SB1182 but did not speak:
Jose Borrajero, representing self
Antoinette Lane, representing self
Chad Heinrich, Lobbyist, Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce
Jeff Sandquist, National Association of Industrial and Office Properties
Farrell Quinlan, State Director, National Federation of Independent Business
Gretchen Kitchel, Lobbyist, Salt River Project
Terry Hill, representing self
John Baunoch, representing self
Joyce Hill, representing self
Mary Ann Baunoch, representing self
Joy Staveley, Chairman, Coconino County Republican Committee, representing self
Sandi Bartlett, representing self
Names of persons who signed up as neutral on SB1182 but did not speak:
Barry Aarons, Lobbyist, Arizona Association of County School Superintendents
Linda Polito, Tucson Area Schools
Tim Carter, Yavapai County School Superintendent, representing self
Chairman Goodale moved that the Coleman four-line amendment to SB1182 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 2) be adopted. The motion carried.
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA), neutral on SB1182, said dialogue took place with school business officials, ASBA and ATRA; this bill contains compromised language.
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1182 as amended do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 6-2-0-1 (Attachment 3).
SB1350 – ADE school finance revisions – DO PASS
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1350 do pass.
Aaron Wonders, Majority Research Analyst, explained that SB1350 modifies numerous school finance statutes (Attachment 4).
Chris Kotterman, Arizona Department of Education (ADE), spoke in favor of SB1350. He related that this legislation is the result of an annual exercise by ADE to correct technical flaws identified in the school finance statutes. A few provisions are not technical:
· The Coconino County Accommodation School District and Page Unified School District transported students on the same bus, which is efficient; however, both school districts were submitting students for transportation funding resulting in overfunding of pupil transportation costs. The Attorney General's Office said the current wording in statute does not support ADE's interpretation so SB1350 clarifies that one pupil generates one mile one time. It also impacts a similar situation in the Patagonia School Districts in southern Arizona identified in an Auditor General report last year.
· A school district will be eligible for supplemental state aid for fire, flood and natural disaster, which is in direct response to the needs of the Yarnell Elementary School District. Since the fire consumed most of the town, property values substantially decreased resulting in a budget shortfall for the school district. This language will allow the state to treat the school district as a delinquent taxpayer and the school can continue to operate as the aid phases down over three years. It is a relatively small amount: under $100,000 but no more than $500,000.
Mr. Allen asked if the provision
for the Yarnell situation is time-sensitive or permanent and questioned what happens
if the City of Flagstaff burns down or experiences a natural disaster.
Mr. Kotterman replied that it is a permanent statutory change. If the City of
Flagstaff did burn down, it would qualify as a natural disaster and school
districts would qualify for state aid, but SB1350 is narrowly tailored to fire
and flood. There was conversation in the Senate about natural disaster, which
is standard language, but he is amenable to more narrowly defining that if the
Members wish, pending Senator Crandell's approval. Given the problems with
fire and the rural nature of the state, this may happen again and, if so, ADE
would like to be able to extend this provision to small communities.
Vice-Chairman Coleman announced the names of those who signed up in support of SB1350 but did not speak:
Kevin McCarthy, Arizona Tax Research Association
Vice-Chairman Coleman announced the names of those who signed up as neutral on SB1350 but did not speak:
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Question was called on the motion that SB1350 do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 8-0-0-1 (Attachment 5).
SB1393 – ASDB; employment contracts – DO PASS AMENDED
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1393 do pass.
Hannah Mitchell, Majority Research Intern, explained that SB1393 allows the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind (ASDB) Board of Directors to appoint a superintendent for each school and removes eligibility requirements for the superintendent, management staff and supervisory staff (Attachment 6). The Coleman 22-line amendment to SB1393 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 7) reinstates the requirements for management and supervisory staff and reinstates the same requirements for the superintendents beginning on January 1, 2016.
Sherri Collins, Executive Director, Arizona Commission for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing; Member/Secretary, Board of Directors, Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind, stated that the Board of the Arizona Commission for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing is not in support of SB1393. Only two members of the ASDB Board knew about this bill before it was announced at a public meeting. There was no involvement with key stakeholders. The last time ASDB recruited a new superintendent was approximately 17 years ago. Since then, the superintendent has been promoted within the agency. She asked the Members to hold off on SB1393 until 2016 to allow stakeholders to provide meaningful input.
Mr. Meyer asked Ms. Collins' position on the amendment and if she was involved in the drafting. Ms. Collins replied that she was not; some people met with Vice-Chairman Coleman to express concern about removing the requirements and the amendment was drafted after that meeting.
Mrs. Carter said it appears the amendment addresses some of the concerns raised. Ms. Collins indicated that the amendment still allows two superintendents, which is not a solution to the issues. She questioned why the requirements are being held off until 2016 and reinserted later, which does not make sense. The Board needs to address issues internally.
Vice-Chairman Coleman said he understood from the stakeholder meeting that in the last seven years, there were two new superintendents who did not accomplish many things that needed to be done. The intent of the amendment is to reinstate the requirements to be certified for everyone other than the superintendents, allow the superintendents to act as administrators to accomplish what needs to be done and then the requirements would be reinstated for the superintendents.
Ms. Collins said the Board has some work to do to address concerns that were not handled in the past. If there are going to be two superintendents, qualifications will be needed for the blind and for the deaf. It would be better to have an assistant superintendent for the deaf and one for the blind and one superintendent to oversee the school. Having two superintendents for a school for the deaf and blind is unheard of unless there are two separate campuses; ASDB is a combined school.
Mike Williams, President, Board of Directors, Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind, in support of SB1393, apologized for not being able to meet with deaf community representatives and made the following points:
Cynthia Butts, Arizona Association for the Deaf, representing self, opposed SB1393. She said history has shown that a campus with two superintendents does not function well. There is a selection committee in place and one superintendent should be chosen for the school. The deaf and blind communities and parents need to be involved in the process. In other states with campuses like ASBD, it is quite common to have one superintendent. She added that to temporarily waive the requirements until 2016 will not solve anything because then subsections A and B will apply, which she opposes.
Peri Jude Radecic, Executive Director, Arizona Center for Disability Law, spoke in opposition to SB1393 because members of the deaf and blind community were not consulted about this bill and only two members of the ASDB Board had any input before it was introduced. She encouraged the Members to hold the bill and allow everyone an opportunity for input.
Sami Hamed, representing self, opposed SB1393. He said he served as a Board member of ASDB for six years. This bill will not solve the problems Mr. Williams talked about; having two superintendents will only create division. One superintendent can hire good people to carry out the functions of educating the children. Regarding the April 15 deadline, he said when he was on the Board, contracts were renewed and not renewed all the time. The April 15 deadline ensured that the Board got the job done and offered protection to employees, so taking that away is wrong. Eliminating the requirements relating to deafness or blindness is wrong and a disservice to the children. He asked the Members to vote no on SB1393.
Robert Kresmer, National Federation of the Blind of Arizona, noted that SB1393 united various stakeholders of ASDB in opposition; even members of the Board are not supportive of the bill. He asked that the Members not pass SB1393 and give stakeholders a chance to work with the Board to develop changes that are not only necessary, but constructive. If this bill passes, there will be unforeseen results that will cost ASDB for uses other than educating children.
Linda Amann, representing self, opposed to SB1393, said she has been a teacher at the Phoenix Day School for the Deaf (PDSD) for 35 years and at ASDB. She attended Board meetings for many years, which has a nomination screening committee to search for superintendents, but for the past six years, the Board members hand-selected people. The Board needs to return to using a nomination screening committee and find the best superintendent for both needs. She asked the Members to oppose this bill for the sake of the children.
Donald Porterfield, Legislative Director, National Federation of the Blind of Arizona, in opposition to SB1393, said today was the first time an attempt was made to communicate to the blind community about this bill, which requires the active participation of all stakeholders. There are some issues occurring at the ASDB, but trying to fix those with bad legislation is not the right way to go; if anything, additional problems will be created. Without the critical background in specialized education or educating individuals with sensory disabilities, the superintendent will be "flying blind". The superintendent has to be competent in sensory disabilities in order to oversee the principals as they implement strategies from the Board. He asked the Committee to vote down the bill and give parties an opportunity to work out a solution that will be amenable to all.
Henry Pastor Garcia, representing self, opposed SB1393. He said his wife looked on the Internet and the Board meeting minutes do not mention this bill; however, comments appeared in the Tucson Daily Star by a reporter about what Mr. Williams was planning to do. He added that the testimony given by Mr. Williams in the Senate and House is contradictory.
Michelle Herbold, representing self, opposed SB1393. She stated that she is the parent of three deaf children who attend PDSD and Vice-President of PDSD's Parent Staff Organization (PSO). She encouraged the Members to vote against this bill and recommended that input be obtained from the various stakeholders.
David Bailey, representing self, opposed SB1393. He indicated he is the father of a son who attends PDSD and is the PSO President. This process has happened in such a fast manner and so removed from the community. He wishes there had been an effort to connect before decisions were made.
Beverly Hawkins, representing self, opposed SB1393. She said she taught at PDSD for a few years and she is currently the ASDB Alumni President. She submitted that the language in this bill is not quite right and there was not enough input from the deaf and blind communities. She spoke against having two separate superintendents and the interim proviso to have no qualifications. She added that she is aware there are problems that need to be addressed at ASDB, but this is not the solution.
Alan Amann, representing self, opposed SB1393. He remarked that he is a former student of PDSD and the father of a son who graduated last year from ASDB. He stated that the Board has the power to make changes and by continuing to use their consultant will have a better chance of continuing on and complying with state law. He does not see how the current qualifications of the superintendent are in the way and they did not prevent the Board from finding a replacement superintendent all these years. He expressed opposition to removal of the April 15 deadline.
Lisa Furr, President, Arizona Association of the Deaf, opposed SB1393. She stated that the Association is affiliated with the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) and provided a letter from NAD in opposition (Attachment 8). She stated that the language in subsections A and B is contradictory. She spoke against eliminating the eligibility requirement for the superintendent and having two superintendents, noting that only two Board members were aware of this legislation and Mr. Williams did not bother to include the other Board members or anyone else in the community. She provided a copy of a page from the ASDB policy manual, noting that there have been violations (Attachment 9), including Arizona's open meeting law since there was no public notification about developing this bill. She added that there are plenty of people who are qualified and ready to serve as the superintendent to make ASDB a successful school. The Board needs to take the time to conduct a proper search and soon.
Judith Robbins, representing self, opposed SB1393. She said she is a former teacher at PDSD of 20 years, but she left two years ago from a very hostile work environment. She only became aware of SB1393 a few weeks ago after it passed out of the Senate. She has seen numerous qualified, great educators leave ASDB, forced out by the administration that is currently and has been investigated, which has hurt the children. This bill does not solve the issue at hand that still exists in the school. She has seen the Board in action and agrees that there has been internal strife and mismanagement, but this bill does not solve that issue. This would be a poor setup for ASDB that would directly impact the children. She asked the Members to wait until next year so input can be obtained from the community to develop a better bill.
Names of persons who signed up in opposition to SB1393 but did not speak:
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Esther Schultz, representing self
Brian Dunleavy, representing self
Jolynn Ribbeck, representing self
Diana Pereyda, representing self
Kenna Browning, representing self
Donna Kruck, Arizona Bridge to Independent Living
Franklyn Amann, representing self
Amy Murillo, representing self
Jene Andreacola, representing self
Frank Pereyda, representing self
Paula Lawton, representing self
Ronald Hazelett-Weeks, representing self
Melissa Keast, representing self
Rose Andreacola, representing self
Timothy Lewis, representing self
Fatema Lewis, representing self
Mr. Allen moved that the Coleman 22-line amendment to SB1393 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 7) be adopted. The motion carried.
Mr. Allen moved that SB1393 as amended do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 4-3-0-2 (Attachment 10).
SB1237 – empowerment scholarship accounts; revisions – DO PASS AMENDED (ON RECONSIDERATION)
Mrs. Carter moved that having voted on the prevailing side, the Committee immediately reconsider its action of Monday, March 3, 2014, whereby the Committee failed to pass the motion that SB1237 receive a do pass recommendation. The motion carried.
Mr. Allen moved that SB1237 do pass.
Mrs. Carter moved that the Carter 24-line amendment to SB1237 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 11) be adopted.
Aaron Wonders, Majority Research Analyst, advised that SB1237 modifies statutes relating to the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) program (Attachment 12). The Carter 24-line amendment to SB1237 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 11) specifies that ESA monies are 90 percent of base support level and charter school additional assistance only if the student previously attended a charter school and includes session law specifying that money placed in current ESA accounts will continue for those existing students.
Mrs. Carter said she offered this amendment in response to previous testimony related to this bill. It grandfathers in participants who have been receiving the increased amount in their ESA accounts based upon the Superintendent of Public Instruction's interpretation of statute passed last year. These programs were promoted to meet unmet academic needs and designed to save the state money. The amendment is consistent with Representative Debbie Lesko's testimony on the Floor that it was the intent to provide funding at the 90 percent amount of what the student would have received from the state in their previous academic setting. In response to a question, Mrs. Carter indicated that she does not know if Senator Kimberly Yee supports the amendment although the possibility of an amendment was discussed when the bill was initially heard.
Chris Kotterman, Arizona Department of Education, spoke in favor of SB1237 and the amendment. He said the ability to adjust the disbursement schedule, the compulsion for parents who have an ESA to spend a portion of the money at least quarterly and the ability of ADE to contract for third-party evaluators for individual education plans (IEP) are all important to the efficient and effective administration of the ESA program. The original language was meant to clarify what ADE believed was the Legislature's intent; the amendment provides clarity, and if it is adopted, ADE will administer the program accordingly. He expressed appreciation for the session law so ADE will not have to reduce the amount for students already in the program. With the effective date of the bill, the new amounts will apply to the next application cycle for the beginning of the 2015 school year.
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association (ASBA), stated that ASBA still has a problem with the entire system, but with adoption of the amendment, which corrects the issue she mentioned when the bill was heard previously, ASBA's position on SB1237 is neutral.
Names of persons who signed up in support of SB1237 but did not speak:
Terry Hill, representing self
Josh Kredit, Lobbyist, Center for Arizona Policy
Aiden Fleming, Arizona Department of Education
Julie Batt, representing self
Names of persons who signed up in opposition to SB1237 but did not speak:
Steve Muratore, representing self
Virginia Brant, Lobbyist, All Arizona School Retirees Association
Rivko Knox, representing self
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Tory Anderson, Lobbyist, Secular Coalition for Arizona
Gini McGirr, Legislative Chair, League of Women Voters of Arizona
Rita O. Young, representing self
Charles Essigs, Director of Government Relations, Arizona Association of School Business Officials
Barbara Jean Robertson, representing self
Eleanor Eisenberg, League of Women Voters of Arizona
Elaine Perillo, representing self
Ralph Perillo, representing self
Ben Love, representing self
Joshua Judd, representing self
Michael Dayton, representing self
Linda Polito, Tucson Area Schools
Question was called on the motion that the Carter 24-line amendment to SB1237 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 11) be adopted. The motion carried.
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1237 as amended do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 7-1-0-1 (Attachment 13).
SB1092 – school finance; funding system – DO PASS
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1092 do pass.
Aaron Wonders, Majority
Research Analyst, explained that SB1092 establishes the Arizona
K-12 Education Fund to disburse basic state aid and additional state aid
(Attachment 14).
Senator Chester Crandell, sponsor, indicated that this is an attempt to review the education funding system that was adopted in the 1980s. The education system has changed to include charter schools, etc., that are funded differently. This bill also attempts to follow the Constitution, which says the state has the responsibility to fund education in a uniform manner, which is not currently being done. It is a first step. There is a need to look at providing a designated funding source rather than the General Fund and then look at school finance reforms.
Chris Kotterman, Lobbyist, Arizona Department of Education (ADE), neutral on SB1092, related that ADE supports the general premise of simplifying school finance in Arizona and making it equitable is a desirable outcome, but some items were brought to his attention:
· Current statute requires equalization assistance to be subtracted from the base support level, and other statutes are set up in such a way that property tax is collected at the local level, so those will have to be looked at.
· Property tax revenues are collected in November and May. ADE pays state aid on a monthly basis so if the entire formula amount is paid out, some cash flow issues will need to be worked out.
· Delinquent taxpayers who do not pay their property taxes are a local problem, but if all the money is pooled at the state level, it becomes a state problem.
Mrs. Carter asked if the data system complicates this issue. Mr. Kotterman replied that it will take some work to become automated but, hopefully, ADE will obtain money for the data system.
Senator Crandell remarked that in light of the new information he was not aware of, he is willing to entertain an amendment on the Floor to delay implementation until those issues are addressed.
Names of persons who signed up as neutral on SB1092 but did not speak:
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Charles Essigs, Director of Government Relations, Arizona Association of School Business Officials
Question was called on the motion that SB1092 do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 5-3-0-1 (Attachment 15).
SB1102 – school facilities board revisions – DO PASS
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1102 do pass.
Aaron Wonders, Majority Research Analyst, explained that SB1102 modifies School Facilities Board (SFB) statutes and allows certain child care facilities to use floor bedding rather than cribs (Attachment 16).
Mr. Allen asked if the floor bedding portion is germane to the underlying bill. Mr. Wonders said he talked to the Rules Attorney who indicated there is reference in that portion to SFB statutes; however, since the bill has not been heard by the Rules Committee, no official recommendation has been made.
In response to a question about emergency cribs, Mr. Wonders explained that there would be floor bedding, but an evacuation crib would be placed near an emergency exit. In the event of an emergency, infants would be placed in the crib and evacuated.
Dean Gray, Executive Director, School Facilities Board, in support of SB1102, in response to questions, stated that the SFB statutes speak only to K-12 school districts and not to day care. The SFB needs the recordkeeping ability, and if the bill fails because of the floor bedding portion, it will be difficult for the SFB to operate efficiently.
Mr. Allen surmised that there is no issue with either portion of the bill but suggested that the floor bedding portion could be addressed separately on the Floor. Mrs. Carter stated that this is the only opportunity to discuss the floor bedding portion.
Mr. Gray, in response to a question, indicated that there is no impact to the General Fund with the SFB portion of the bill.
Colby Bower, Chief Legislative Liaison, Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS), neutral on SB1102, stated that ADHS administrative rules require infants to be placed in cribs. A few Montessori-style schools would like to place infants on floor mats, which ADHS has no problem with; it is a policy decision. As far as the emergency cribs and other safety requirements in the bill, a fire chief questioned what would be done in the event of a fire if infants are sleeping on floor mats. Current rules contemplate placing three infants in one crib and wheeling them out as quickly as possible, so for every three infants, the facility would need an emergency crib for evacuation purposes, which was agreed to in stakeholder meetings.
Mr. Meyer asked if there are any health risks associated with using the mats and if a specific mat must be used. Mr. Bower responded that the administrative rules for cribs are based on national safety standards, but there are no national safety standards established for floor mats; however, ADHS does prescribe a certain thickness for the mats. The largest safety concern would be another child or an item falling on a sleeping infant, which the bill attempts to address with a higher staff-to-child ratio.
Senator John McComish, representing self, stated that the first portion of SB1102 merely updates SFB statutes; the second part has to do with mats, cribs and infants. His friend is the owner of a Montessori school in Ahwatukee, which has been obtaining exceptions from ADHS to place infants on mats rather than in cribs. The school has been in business for approximately 20 years and has been doing this for a long time. It is what the parents want and there have been no public safety or adverse health issues. This bill contains sensible rules to allow the school to continue utilizing this practice.
Mr. Allen asked if Senator McComish would have a problem separating the issues if they are deemed not germane. Senator McComish stated that he is not particular about the mechanics of accomplishing the goal of this legislation; to the best of his knowledge there is not a germaneness issue, but he is not a Rules attorney.
In response to a question about the need for this legislation, Mr. Bower related that the operator of this particular child care facility received an exception in the past by obtaining doctors' notes for all of the enrolled children stating that it is a special need for the child to be on a floor mat; however, a surveyor recently said the exceptions can no longer be granted and the facility was cited. ADHS ultimately decided it could be done, but it is burdensome for the operator of the facility to obtain notes from physicians and there were issues such as what kind of doctor should provide the note, etc. It is primarily sought for Montessori philosophy schools; ADHS licenses 135 of those facilities.
Senator McComish stated he is aware of six facilities that have contacted him and ADHS. He would be amazed if this is requested by 135 facilities, but it could be possible.
Shetal Walters, Executive Director, Desert Garden Montessori School, spoke in support of SB1102. She related that the school has functioned with mats for 13 years because their philosophy is about empowering, building independence and creating safety and bonds, which cannot be done with cribs since they are extremely restrictive. There are 26 reported crib-related injuries per day in this nation, but their school has had zero injuries in 13 years. The bill requires a 1:4 staff-to-child ratio instead of 1:5, which is typically required. Regarding the evacuation cribs, she provided pictures, noting that if there are 16 cribs, which is what the school is licensed for, versus mats, trying to get a crib wheeled out of a room in case of an emergency is almost impossible (Attachment 17). Evacuation cribs would be outside of the room by the exit and there would be three babies per crib, which makes more sense because it is not in the environment where there is a lot of clutter.
Calvin Hurlbert, representing
self, in support of SB1102, said he is from the Desert Garden Montessori School.
When babies sleep in cribs, they often crawl under the mattress and sometimes
get hurt, whereas if babies sleep on mats, it is impossible for them to crawl
under the mats unless they lift the mats up. Also, if babies sleep in cribs,
they have to wait to be put in and taken out of the crib and since their only
way of communication is screaming and crying, it is complete chaos. Sometimes babies
try to climb out of cribs and get hurt, whereas with mats, it is impossible to
fall out or off. He read a letter from a classmate stating that for over
10 years, mats have been used on the floor for infants, which has opened up the
room and given the children freedom to get up when they want and follow the Montessori
philosophy. In past years, ADHS allowed cribs or mats to be used in the infant
program, but recent changes only allow cribs to be used, which restricts
children. Cribs take up space and create safety hazards.
Names of persons who signed up in support of SB1102 but did not speak:
Karen Hurlbert, representing self
Lenore Encinas, representing self
Jackson Crumm, representing self
Raneem Mujahed, representing self
Zoe Jeffries, representing self
Emily Ladewig, representing self
William Hall, representing self
David Kuta, representing self
Chloe Kuznia, representing self
Gabby Fonseca, representing self
Ava Trimble, representing self
Eliot Ovacik, representing self
Glenn Hurlbert, representing self
Dean Gray, representing self
Names of persons who signed up as neutral on SB1102 but did not speak:
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Charles Essigs, Director of Government Relations, Arizona Association of School Business Officials
Question was called on the motion that SB1102 do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 7-0-0-2 (Attachment 18).
SB1336 – school property; leases; immunity – DO PASS
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1336 do pass.
Hannah Mitchell, Majority Research Intern, explained that SB1336 allows charter schools to permit the use of school property to a person or organization and grants immunity from civil liability to charter schools, school districts and their employees for the use of school property (Attachment 19).
Nicole Olmstead, Government Relations Director, American Heart Association, in support of SB1336, provided a handout (Attachment 20) and stated that schools, specifically within Maricopa County, do not believe the bill from two years ago actually limited liability when the schools open up their school grounds. Under Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 15, § 1105, school districts are allowed to let groups access school property for uncompensated and compensated use; however, it is much more difficult, for example, to charge a group of five children playing basketball, so SB1336 protects school districts, employees and governing boards from civil liability if they allow uncompensated and compensated use of school grounds, as long as there is no intentional misconduct or gross negligence. During the hearing in the Senate, charter schools were included to provide parity.
Names of persons who signed up in support of SB1336 but did not speak:
Brian Hummell, American Cancer Society; Cancer Action Network
Tim Carter, Yavapai County School Superintendent, representing self
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Barry Aarons, Lobbyist, Arizona Association of County School Superintendents
Gretchen Martinez, Lobbyist, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Charles Essigs, Director of Government Relations, Arizona Association of School Business Officials
Jay Kaprosy, Lobbyist, Arizona Charter Schools Association
Question was called on the motion that SB1336 do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 7-0-0-2 (Attachment 21).
SB1391 – schools; noncertificated employees; fingerprinting – DO PASS AMENDED S/E
S/E: same subject
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1391 do pass.
Chairman Goodale moved that the Coleman 25-page strike-everything amendment to SB1391 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 22) be adopted.
Hannah Mitchell, Majority Research Intern, explained that the Coleman 25-page strike-everything amendment to SB1391 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 22) allows charter schools and school districts to require noncertified and unpaid personnel to obtain a fingerprint clearance card (Attachment 23).
Jay Kaprosy, Arizona Charter Schools Association, spoke in favor of the strike-everything amendment to SB1391. He said Senator Kimberly Yee, sponsor, worked with the charter school community and others in the education community on concerns about the bill as introduced, which was a dramatic expansion of fingerprint clearance cards. The strike-everything amendment provides the ability for charter schools and district schools to require fingerprint clearance cards for noninstructional staff.
Senator Kimberly Yee, sponsor, related that she and Senator Robert Meza talked during the interim about the importance of school safety. This bill addresses noncertified employees in school settings; one particular school district was prohibited from fingerprinting those employees since it is not required by statute.
Abedon Fimbres, Director of Safety and Emergency Management, Isaac School District, neutral on SB1391, provided a copy of a fingerprint clearance card with a list of dangerous offenses on the reverse side (Attachment 24). He related that as a certified individual, he has a fingerprint clearance card that is good for six years, so if he was arrested in any jurisdiction for any of those offenses, it would be reported to the Department of Public Safety, the Arizona Department of Education and the school district. If a noncertified individual, who is not required to have a fingerprint clearance card, was arrested for any of those offenses, those notifications would not be made. An individual who worked for the school district was convicted of aggravated assault and the school district was not made aware of the issue. The employee was on work furlough and continued to work, and then received probation. If a certified individual had been charged and convicted of that crime, the school district would have been notified immediately and that individual would have been released from contract.
Names of persons who signed up in support of the strike-everything amendment to SB1391 but did not speak:
Barry Aarons, Lobbyist, Arizona Association of County School Superintendents
Names of persons who signed up as neutral on the strike-everything amendment to SB1391 but did not speak:
Janice Palmer, Arizona School Boards Association
Doreen Zannis, representing self
Sabrina Vazquez, Lobbyist, Arizona School Administrators Association
Dennis Seavers, Executive Director, Arizona Board of Fingerprinting
Question was called on the motion that the Coleman 25-page strike-everything amendment to SB1391 dated 03/13/14 (Attachment 22) be adopted. The motion carried.
Chairman Goodale moved that SB1391 as amended do pass. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 7-0-0-2 (Attachment 25).
Chairman Goodale thanked the Committee Members, the education community and staff for their work.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 6:46 p.m.
_______________________________
Linda Taylor, Committee Secretary
April 7, 2014
(Original minutes, attachments and audio on file in the Chief Clerk’s Office; video archives available at http://www.azleg.gov)
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
15
March 17, 2014
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------