MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES AND FACILITIES
Sixty-seventh Session
February 1, 1993
The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 1:30 p.m., on Monday, February 1, 1993, in Room 226 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
Senator William R. O'Donnell, Vice Chairman
Senator Randolph J. Townsend
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator Bob Coffin
Senator Diana M. Glomb
Senator Lori L. Brown
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Ernest E. Adler
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
None
OTHERS PRESENT:
John H. Sarb, Administrator, Division of Child and Family Services
Deanne Blazzard, President, Foster Parents of Southern Nevada
Elaine Brooks, Treasurer, Foster Parents of Southern Nevada
Harry E. Neal, Jr., Vice President for Finance and Administration, University of Nevada Las Vegas
David Hollenbeck, Chief of Police, University of Nevada Las Vegas
Jim Richardson, Nevada Faculty Alliance
Ray Bacon, Nevada Manufacturers Association
Maxine Nietz
Sandy Coyle, Concerned Citizen
Jeanie Simons, Parent
Gayle Thompson, Concerned Citizen
Bonnie Pernell, Nevada Parent Teachers Association
Lindsey Jydstrup, Nevada State Education Association
Lauren Smith, Mother
Mary Peterson, Department of Education
Cheryl Lau, Secretary of State
Marcia Bandera, Elko County School District
Eugene T. Paslov, Superintendent of Public Instruction, State of Nevada
Dr. Patty Hawkins, Carson City School District
Dr. Gregory Betts, Nevada Rural Alliance
Al Bellister, Nevada Education Association
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 56.
SENATE BILL 56: Provides cost-of-living increases for reimbursements paid to foster parents.
Senator Diana Glomb, Washoe County, District 1, Chairman of the Legislative Committee To Review Child and Family Services created by (S.B. 611 of the Sixty-Sixth Session, addressed S.B. 56 in her summary (Exhibit C).
SENATE BILL 611
OF THE SIXTY-SESSION: Makes various changes regarding provision of services for children and families.
Senator Glomb explained that foster parents are currently receiving $337 per month for a child age 13 years and older and $281 for a child 12 years of age and younger. She stated the $209,000 plus per year quoted would be made up of 35 percent federal dollars and the rest general fund dollars.
Mr. John Sarb, Administrator for the Division of Child and Family Services advised that the division supports the notion of cost of living increase indexed to Consumer Price Index (CPI) for foster parents as referenced in his summary (Exhibit D). The foster parent rate in Nevada does not reflect the actual cost of care. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates in the west the average cost is $542 per month for a young child and $658 per month for a adolescent.
Mr. Sarb advised they are paying $281 plus small clothing and school allowances for children under the age of 12 and $337 plus allowances for children older than 12 which works out to 57 percent of the estimated cost of care reimbursement. He advised there has not been an increase in 5 years.
Chairman Rawson asked how much it would be in Fiscal Year (FY) 94 for every 1 percent of CPI. Mr. Sarb responded it would be an additional $51,287 and in FY 95 an additional $53,791 as the budget is currently constructed. They would need the estimated CPI added into the budget before they could grant that.
Chairman Rawson asked if he had considered other possibilities foreseeing there is an adjustment but allowing for the fact that it may be difficult to give a fixed percent. Mr. Sarb responded that he has not scanned their budget with this amount specifically in mind. He advised all substitute care comes to $10 million can not squeeze another $153,000 out of that.
Senator Glomb insisted without some increase of revenue in this area we would be short changing the children in our state and added there had not been an increase in 5 years.
Chairman Rawson responded, "Your message is well understood. We can tie this to the CPI or to some percentage of new revenue available to the state."
Mr. Sarb clarified that the estimates are prepared on family foster care. The language reads foster parent which by itself may have a wider definition than family foster care. The area of concern in this issue is the family foster care, not foster parent.
Senator Brown questioned if this received a yes vote without a budget mechanism would less children be taken in the system or is there some provision to deal with that. Mr. Sarb responded no and advised children coming into foster care are court ordered into foster care.
Ms. Deanne Blazzard, President, Foster Parents of Southern Nevada testified in support of CPI increase (Exhibit E). She advised that foster cares last increase was 2 percent in August 1988. She included a suggested minimum clothing list (Exhibit F) for children in care and explained that the foster parent cannot provide the minimum with the present clothing allowance.
Chairman Rawson presented to the secretary a list (Exhibit G) of 21 names in support of S.B. 56 to be included in the record.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 56.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 16: Extends provision allowing inter-local agreements between police department of University of Nevada System and other law enforcement agencies to all counties.
Mr. Buster Neal, Vice President for Finance in the Administration at University Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) began by introducing David Hollenbeck, Director of Public Safety, Chief of Police, UNLV. Mr. Hollenbeck asked to have this provision extended as the legislation currently stands and explained it allowed for inter-local agreements in counties of less than 400,000.
Senator Coffin asked if the UNLV officers are trained the same as other officers. Mr. Neal responded the UNLV officers are ranked as a category one peace officer, the same category as a officer in a police department and are required to receive at least 24 hours of training per year. Departmentally they average 60 hours of training per year.
Mr. Jim Richardson, representing the Nevada Faculty Alliance, testified in favor of S.B. 16. He stated it was good in terms of protecting students and others who are involved in campus activities and urged the passage of this corrective legislation.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 16.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S. B. 91.
SENATE BILL 91: Allows school-based decision making in public schools.
Senator Ernie Adler, Capital Senatorial District, outlined briefly S.B. 91. The first part of the bill states that public schools in which not less than two-thirds of the teachers vote may opt for a school based decision making system. He explained there are various parameters for the number of schools in counties according to the population.
Senator Adler stressed section 5 gives the school board of trustees authority to prescribe rules for: election of the school council; the interactions with parents; record keeping and appeals process in the method of reporting progress of the pupil; plans for improvement of school; and methods for the allocation of money to schools in the administration of the budget.
Sector Adler emphasized that an amendment needs to be in place in case a school does not show improvement within two years, it would revert back to the control of the local school district board of trustees.
Senator Adler stated section 6 defines the school council which consists of three parents who are elected by the Parent Teachers Association (P.T.A.) or a similar organization within the school. Three teachers who are chosen by the teachers and the principle as chairman of the board would serve as the school council.
Senator Adler advised in section 7, there is an ability to appoint additional committees for teachers to work on special problems.
Senator Adler stated in section 8, the council selects the curriculum
and courses of study, and in his opinion, one of the more critical portions of the bill.
Chairman Rawson asked if all of the guidelines need to be put aside.
Senator Adler answered yes and explained the idea behind this bill was to allow parents and teachers to be able to operate the school in conjunction with the principal to see if they could do better in terms of student achievement.
Senator Glomb questioned if the schools would be required to follow a mandated course of study. Senator Adler responded no.
Senator Glomb asked if this would supersede what we have now. Senator Adler answered that is correct.
Senator Adler stated section 2 gives the liberty to move around the standard assignment hours and the 180 school days. There would be the assignment of pupil to classes and programs and they would determine the hours the classes are in session. They would design the discipline code for the pupils within the school and would decide upon extra circular programs to be offered by the school.
Senator Adler pointed out that section 10 permits the selection of textbooks, instructional materials, equipment and supplies.
Senator Adler strongly advised changing the wording from "may prohibit" to shall prohibit selection of textbooks in section 11, to prevent the loss of public funds.
Referring to section 12, Senator Adler stated a school may submit a model program to the state or local board and the model program which has been approved by the board may be used in lieu of an actual school based decision making program. He added if a school comes up with a superior program which would increase student performance, they want to be able to use this program in other schools in the state.
Senator Adler reviewed section 13 and pointed out the superintendent, member of board of trustees or employees shall not intentionally interfere with the program. The first time that happens, a warning is given and the second time is subject to dismissal. He added this type of program would not operate very well if it was actively being sabotaged by persons within the system.
Senator Adler suggested with the amendment, if student achievement is not there, the superintendent can suggest that program not be continued in that school, following a two year trial period.
Senator Adler stated section 18 allows flexibility in the law for curricula and text book selection, which are exceptions to the current state law. He added section 19 does the same thing for discipline.
Senator Brown referred to section 19, subsection 4 and asked, "Do you perceive the rules for discipline as being superseded by state rules regarding corporal punishment."
Senator Adler responded no, they are trying to restore classroom discipline and empower the teacher to institute disciplinary actions. He stated at the present time in certain schools the only disciplinary action is where the teacher turns it over to the vice-principle and added it was intended to decentralize discipline rather than having it centralized.
Senator O'Donnell stated that it appeared the school based decision making process would be completely autonomous from every other board, superintendent or trustee and was concerned about giving up complete autonomy without any kind of oversight. He asked would there be any objection to an oversight committee who would do an ongoing evaluation? Senator Adler responded, the school board could take away the authority from the local school if there were drastic drops in performance in social and academic skills.
Mr. Ray Bacon, Executive Director, Manufacturers Association presented videos on Saving American's Children (Exhibit H, Partners For Success (Exhibit I) and a brochure (Exhibit J) which show the changes in education reform around the country. A video (Exhibit K) was viewed for 5 minutes. The subject of the video shown (Exhibit K) was site-based decision making with parents being involved with the education. (Exhibit H, I, J, and K are on file in the Research Library.)
Chairman Rawson asked, "Is there always someone accountable in the classroom?"
Senator Adler answered it was his understanding the teacher was in charge in the classroom.
Chairman Rawson asked what could be done for a college bound student trapped in a school with non-college bound curriculum?
Senator Adler, responded that it was his understanding that in the State of Nevada, any student that applies with reasonable grounds to go to another school, with very few exceptions, would be allowed.
Chairman Rawson, pointed out this may have an effect on the students since there are serious restrictions on students participating in sports activities.
Ms. Maxine Nietz, testified she is in support of S.B. 91. She stated our teachers and principals must be free to work with parents to make each school an independent learning center that works for that school,
staff and students. She commented the current congress may pass a school choice bill and Nevada schools must be ready.
Ms. Sandy Coyle, from Douglas County, and a parent of four children testified in support of S.B. 91 as referenced in her summary (Exhibit L).
Ms. Jeanie Simons, of Carson City, and a parent of three boys testified in support of S.B. 91 because it encourages parental involvement and allows the teachers responsibility they deserve.
Ms. Gayle Thompson, a business person in Carson City testified in support of S.B. 91. She would like to make schools responsible for themselves in getting parent and teacher involvement. She feels the quality of the students produced is critical, especially for the business community.
Ms. Bonnie Parnell, immediate past president of the Nevada Parent Teachers Association (P.T.A.) testified the P.T.A. does not take a position on S.B. 91. She explained neither at the national P.T.A. level nor at the Nevada state P.T.A. level had there been a stand taken on the issue of site based management. She advised the national position is, if a local school district or the state legislature were looking into site based management, the P.T.A.'s involvement would be to make sure there would be equitable parental involvement in that management team.
Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Parnell to explain the term equitable parental involvement. Ms. Parnell clarified in order to have equal parental involvement on a management team, equitable would mean four and four or three and three.
Senator Brown, questioned whether or not parents could pull their students out of the state mandated sex education and aids program. Ms. Parnell answered yes, but they would have to notify the school.
Senator Neal asked Ms. Parnell her opinion on Section 5, which gives the school board the authority for forcing the rules. Ms. Parnell advised that both national and state P.T.A. have been addressing the elimination of corporal punishment in all schools. P.T.A. is adamant they consider the needs of every child and not be slanted by the personal opinion of 3 or 4 people, and what kind of discipline would not be allowed.
Ms. Lindsey Jydstrup, testified in support of the concept of site based decision making on behalf of the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA). She advised there are concerns in reference to S.B. 91 including section 5, subsection 5, procedure to obtain waivers of rules of the district and section 9, subsection 2, regarding hours of employment and currently the length of the school day. Also, the limitations that can be placed on academic freedom by the provision that is written, allows the council to establish the practices of instruction. She urged strengthening the language that the school district may prohibit the council from selecting textbooks of a sectarian or a denominational nature. She advised the language is somewhat vague in section 13, subsection 1, prohibiting a school board member or employee from quote "interfering with the program" and it gives the school board authority to admonish or dismiss an employee, superintendent or school board of trustee member for this interference.
Chairman Rawson, asked in reference to the bargaining concept, do you see the employees or teachers in a school district being able to bargain for this. Ms. Jydstrup responded the way the law is set up now is county by county bargaining agreement with the various employment groups such as teachers, administrators, non-licensed employees. She added a site based decision making concept could be worked out in the context and not abrogating any of the collective bargaining agreements that are already in place under chapter 288 (NRS).
Chairman Rawson asked would you allow for the decision of a single school within a district or does every school have to change? Ms. Jydstrup responded that she felt it should be done in the context of the law as it now exists, but there were ways that could be worked out.
Ms. Lauren Smith, mother of a special needs child from Washoe County School District spoke out in concern for lack of provisions for the special needs children. Her concern is that special needs children will end up completely isolated from the rest of the school population. She would like to see terminology included indicating none of these provisions should be construed to mean that they infringe upon the federal protection of the special needs children.
Ms. Mary Peterson, Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, Department of Education gave testimony in favor of school based decision making (Exhibit M). Ms. Peterson advised she has four concerns: 1) S.B. 91 contains no accountability, "How will we know that school-based decision making has accomplished what it is supposed to accomplish"; 2) S.B. 91 would mandate school based decision making; 3) S.B. 91 would not provide training; 4) S.B. 91 grants broad powers to the school council. She recommended goals, outcomes and accountability measures be clearly established; school-based decision making be implemented on a voluntary bases; training for all participating staff; and waivers from existing laws, regulations and policies be granted on a school by school basis, depending on the needs of the school.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 91.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 66.
SENATE BILL 66: Changes date by which superintendent of public instruction must submit certificate to certain county clerks stating number and offices of trustees of county school district to be filled at next general election.
Cheryl Lau, Secretary of State, addressed that S.B. 66 is a mere technical change and deals with the submission of the number of trustees to be elected at the next general election. Ms. Lau advised this is a change from June 1st to January 1, the beginning filing date for candidates.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 66.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 47.
SENATE BILL 47: Requires schools to conduct drills to instruct pupils on procedures in event of chemical explosion or other related emergency.
Lindsey Jydstrup, representing NSEA gave testimony to go on record in support of S.B. 47. This would provide for three drills a year to instruct students, teachers and educational employees in emergencies procedures other than fire.
Senator Coffin asked Ms. Jydstrup if it were possible to include the three drills in the nine drills mandated? Ms. Jydstrup advised she had not discussed this with Senator Smith.
Ms. Marcia Bandera, Elko County School District stated concern about impacting instructional time and would like to support substituting some of the mandated fire drills for either chemical explosion or earthquake. The appropriate drill would depend on the geographical area of the school district.
Chairman Rawson questioned what three categories she would recommend and she responded, fire, chemical/gas and earthquake/tornado.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 47.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 65.
SENATE BILL 65: Allows pupil to apply credits received for certain courses of education completed at community college or university to total number of credits required for graduation from high school.
Ms. Mary Peterson, Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction testified on behalf of the State Department of Education and State Board of Education in support of S.B. 65 as referenced in her summary (Exhibit N).
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 65.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 67.
SENATE BILL 67: Changes grades during which examinations for achievement and proficiency must be given to pupils.
Ms. Mary Peterson, Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, testified on behalf of the State Department of Education and the State Board of Education in support of S.B. 67 in her summary (Exhibit O). Dr. Eugene Paslov, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Department of Education, stated there are ways in which the department will be able to adapt the scores from 3rd to 4th grade during the transitional period as they begin a new basis for comparison. This testing program is the statewide proficiency testing, assessment program.
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 67.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 68.
SENATE BILL 68: Removes certain restrictions on transfer and reassignment of unlicensed educational employees.
Dr. Patty Hawkins, Director of Personnel, Carson City School District testified in favor of S.B. 68, which seeks to clarify the language for involuntary transfer of an unlicensed educational personnel which falls within chapter 398.205 of Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). She advised they are looking for the consistency of language from chapter 288 (NRS) and chapter 288.150 (NRS) is addressed as far as involuntary transfer or reassignment of any unlicensed employee. She stated this is an attempt to make the language consistent between chapter 391 (NRS) and chapter 288 (NRS).
Mr. Greg Betts, spoke in favor of S.B. 68 on behalf of the rural school districts of Nevada and advised this is a fundamental management right and suggested this is an important change.
Mr. Al Bellister introduced Ms. Lindsey Jydstrup and himself as representatives for NSEA and spoke in opposition of S.B. 68. He stated the laws currently provide for transfer and reassignment by seniority and advised this proposal deletes all reference to seniority thereby gutting any procedure for transfer and reassignment. He noted the only protection that employees have is chapter 391 (NRS).
Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 68.
* * * * *
Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on S.B. 70.
SENATE BILL 70: Creates legislative committee on education.
Chairman Rawson explained the bill had come out of the Legislative Commission's Subcommittee to study the feasibility of developing a program of computer-assisted instruction for pupils in Kindergarten and Grades 1 through 12, inclusive (S.C.R. 43).
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION:Directs Legislative Commission to study feasibility of developing program of computer-assisted instruction for pupils.
The purpose was to try to develop some forum to establish a statewide set of goals to accomplish a number of things in education. It was felt that it might be best done by a committee of the legislature or a special commission.
Ms. Mary Peterson, Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction, testified in opposition to S.B.70 and presented her summary (Exhibit P). She explained the Nevada State Board of Education unanimously opposes the bill because the legislature has delegated the responsibilities to the state board and to local boards of trustees. Referring to section 4, she advised most of these tasks are being or can be conducted by the Department of Education in cooperation with local school districts. The exception would be the references to education technology.
Senator Rawson stated there may be some indication for a statewide body to raise a public issue with the people of the state regarding educational matters, and technology would be one of the issues. He added there is another forum to do that in a bill that talks about a state plan for technologies. He asked, "Is the state board equipped to develop a dialogue on a statewide basis?"
Ms. Mary Peterson responded the state board sees itself as policy makers and does try to get public forum going on many of the issues you are interested in. She reaffirmed that the state board can and does serve as a policy making body and can lead on some of these issues.
Lindsey Jydstrup, representing NSEA advised that they do support the concept of S.B. 70.
Chairman Rawson adjourned the meeting at 4:00 pm.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Judy Alexander
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman
DATE:
V I D E O
SUBJECT:
Site-based decision making
with parents being involved
with the education.
??
Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities
February 1,1993
Page 1