Home 
Municipal Services MMA weighs in on education reform bills
At a contentious Education Committee hearing on Sept. 17, the MMA stated its support for the framework of the governor’s plan to give state and local officials new powers to restructure and reform problem schools, but voiced strong opposition to a plan to expand the charter school program.
In written testimony, the MMA stated its support for the modernization of education laws to ensure and accelerate progress in underperforming schools.
“We believe that the framework in the Governor’s Readiness schools initiative would provide powerful tools toward this end, and support the in-district charter school model as proposed by [Boston] Mayor [Thomas] Menino as a major reform as well,” wrote MMA Executive Director Geoff Beckwith. “We believe that the charter school expansion plan proposed by the Governor is unaffordable for the state, and oppose the measure because it would exacerbate the deep fiscal troubles that already grip the communities and school districts targeted by the bill. This critical flaw means that [House bill 4163] would not be effective in helping to turn around struggling districts.”
The governor’s Readiness schools bill (House 4164) would allow the state education commissioner to establish “Readiness Acceleration Schools” when local schools are persistently underperforming, with broad state control over school administration. The bill would also give new authority to local school districts to improve local schools by forming “Readiness Advantage Schools” and “Readiness Alliance Schools,” with increased autonomy and flexibility in curriculum, budget, school schedule and calendar, and staffing policies and procedures, including waivers and exemptions from contracts and collective bargaining agreements.
The governor’s charter school bill (H. 4163) would raise the cap on the school aid deduction imposed on school districts to pay tuition to a charter school from 9 percent of total school spending to 18 percent, but only in the poorest performing school districts. The legislation would add an estimated “27,000 new charter school seats” in the lowest-performing school districts, according to the governor’s office.
In its letter to committee members, the MMA pointed out that the proposed expansion of charter schools would be unaffordable. Even if only 10 percent of the new seats were filled in the near term, it would cost the state more than $30 million simply to cover reimbursements for school aid deductions paid to charter schools as tuition, the MMA stated.
“Given the fiscal challenges facing state government in fiscal 2011 and beyond, the reimbursements would almost certainly have to be paid at the expense of other important municipal and education accounts, including the Chapter 70 ‘equity’ provisions that were not funded for fiscal 2010, student transportation reimbursements and special education ‘circuit breaker’ reimbursements that are seriously underfunded this year,” the MMA wrote.
“By means of comparison, the in-district charter school model [proposed in statewide legislation filed by Menino, House 4166] would be paid for within the local school district budget and would not require any extra state appropriation, making the Menino Bill a vastly superior framework” on which to base any expansion of charter schools in Massachusetts.
The MMA also urged caution in review of the Readiness schools legislation and recommended several provisions to include municipal officials in the development of any turn-around plan.
“House 4164 includes a variety of provisions to involve stakeholders in plans to turn around failing schools, including the development, approval and implementation of an ‘innovation plan’ and a ‘performance contract.’ There are several improvements to the proposed process that are necessary in order for the legislation to be effective. The list of stakeholders includes a list of individuals and groups with knowledge of education programs, but there is no apparent participant for budget or financial consideration.
“A sound ‘innovation plan’ or ‘performance contract’ developed without an equally sound plan to pay for it will be hard to implement. We recommend that state and municipal finance officials participate in any stakeholder group. We further recommend that any plan or contract include a budget and long-term funding plan.
“In addition, the Governor’s proposal requires that the Commissioner convene the stakeholder group, but there is no requirement that it occur in the city or town where the school is located or that there be any public participation. We would recommend that the process for developing an ‘innovation plan’ and a ‘performance contract’ include a local public process.
“We also note that the local mayor, board of selectmen or other municipal executive is not authorized to appeal a final innovation plan. Given the possible financial implication of any state-imposed plan, we recommend that a municipal appeal be added.”
The MMA testified before the Education Committee in July in favor of House 4166, an act to reform public education through the creation of in-district charter schools with pay-for-performance, filed by Mayor Menino and Rep. Marie St. Fleur. This bill would empower local school districts to convert any “underperforming” school to an in-district charter school “for the purpose of promoting rapid academic improvement.” Local school districts would also be empowered to establish new in-district charter schools for the purpose of rapid improvement. There would be no cap on the number of locally approved in-district charters.
Municipal Services MMA weighs in on education reform bills
MMA weighs in on education reform bills
At a contentious Education Committee hearing on Sept. 17, the MMA stated its support for the framework of the governor’s plan to give state and local officials new powers to restructure and reform problem schools, but voiced strong opposition to a plan to expand the charter school program.
In written testimony, the MMA stated its support for the modernization of education laws to ensure and accelerate progress in underperforming schools.
“We believe that the framework in the Governor’s Readiness schools initiative would provide powerful tools toward this end, and support the in-district charter school model as proposed by [Boston] Mayor [Thomas] Menino as a major reform as well,” wrote MMA Executive Director Geoff Beckwith. “We believe that the charter school expansion plan proposed by the Governor is unaffordable for the state, and oppose the measure because it would exacerbate the deep fiscal troubles that already grip the communities and school districts targeted by the bill. This critical flaw means that [House bill 4163] would not be effective in helping to turn around struggling districts.”
The governor’s Readiness schools bill (House 4164) would allow the state education commissioner to establish “Readiness Acceleration Schools” when local schools are persistently underperforming, with broad state control over school administration. The bill would also give new authority to local school districts to improve local schools by forming “Readiness Advantage Schools” and “Readiness Alliance Schools,” with increased autonomy and flexibility in curriculum, budget, school schedule and calendar, and staffing policies and procedures, including waivers and exemptions from contracts and collective bargaining agreements.
The governor’s charter school bill (H. 4163) would raise the cap on the school aid deduction imposed on school districts to pay tuition to a charter school from 9 percent of total school spending to 18 percent, but only in the poorest performing school districts. The legislation would add an estimated “27,000 new charter school seats” in the lowest-performing school districts, according to the governor’s office.
In its letter to committee members, the MMA pointed out that the proposed expansion of charter schools would be unaffordable. Even if only 10 percent of the new seats were filled in the near term, it would cost the state more than $30 million simply to cover reimbursements for school aid deductions paid to charter schools as tuition, the MMA stated.
“Given the fiscal challenges facing state government in fiscal 2011 and beyond, the reimbursements would almost certainly have to be paid at the expense of other important municipal and education accounts, including the Chapter 70 ‘equity’ provisions that were not funded for fiscal 2010, student transportation reimbursements and special education ‘circuit breaker’ reimbursements that are seriously underfunded this year,” the MMA wrote.
“By means of comparison, the in-district charter school model [proposed in statewide legislation filed by Menino, House 4166] would be paid for within the local school district budget and would not require any extra state appropriation, making the Menino Bill a vastly superior framework” on which to base any expansion of charter schools in Massachusetts.
The MMA also urged caution in review of the Readiness schools legislation and recommended several provisions to include municipal officials in the development of any turn-around plan.
“House 4164 includes a variety of provisions to involve stakeholders in plans to turn around failing schools, including the development, approval and implementation of an ‘innovation plan’ and a ‘performance contract.’ There are several improvements to the proposed process that are necessary in order for the legislation to be effective. The list of stakeholders includes a list of individuals and groups with knowledge of education programs, but there is no apparent participant for budget or financial consideration.
“A sound ‘innovation plan’ or ‘performance contract’ developed without an equally sound plan to pay for it will be hard to implement. We recommend that state and municipal finance officials participate in any stakeholder group. We further recommend that any plan or contract include a budget and long-term funding plan.
“In addition, the Governor’s proposal requires that the Commissioner convene the stakeholder group, but there is no requirement that it occur in the city or town where the school is located or that there be any public participation. We would recommend that the process for developing an ‘innovation plan’ and a ‘performance contract’ include a local public process.
“We also note that the local mayor, board of selectmen or other municipal executive is not authorized to appeal a final innovation plan. Given the possible financial implication of any state-imposed plan, we recommend that a municipal appeal be added.”
The MMA testified before the Education Committee in July in favor of House 4166, an act to reform public education through the creation of in-district charter schools with pay-for-performance, filed by Mayor Menino and Rep. Marie St. Fleur. This bill would empower local school districts to convert any “underperforming” school to an in-district charter school “for the purpose of promoting rapid academic improvement.” Local school districts would also be empowered to establish new in-district charter schools for the purpose of rapid improvement. There would be no cap on the number of locally approved in-district charters.
Written by MMA Legislative Director John Robertson
