The Republican House/Senate Majority Caucus had a press conference to discuss various subjects on the docket as the end of the legislative session draws near. At about 2:30, Rep Chad Magendanz weighs in on charter legislation.
- there was a tentative agreement this morning
- that there may be potential amendments that may need time for legislators to "digest"
- they were not sure which "vehicle" they would use; 6194, 3000 or 3002
- that they may be able to get this done tomorrow
- more oversight of charters from state superintendent
- districts would have "right of first refusal"
- takes out conversion charters (which he called a "concession from our side"
I had to smile when he said that this bill "tries to anticipate challenges to constitutionality." Well, it's about time, no?
So the changes do address the constitutional issue of Article 3, Section 22 of the state constitution which says that the superintendent will have oversight over "all public schools."
I'm not sure what the second one - "district right of first refusal" means. Does it mean districts can refuse charters in their districts after a certain number of them open (that was in one bill?). Or does it mean districts get to say yes to some charters they like and no to others?
The last change is one that is also good to see because it was just shady and immoral all around.
I don't know how much real support this has from the Democratic side so not sure if the numbers are there.
So we may get charters. I have always said that if someone would write a constitutional law, there wouldn't be much anyone could do if it were voted in by the people or the legislature.
I will say that this bill is NOT what the people voted in. We did not vote on a fill-in-the-blank charter law back in 2012. No one will be able to read this bill (probably) until after the fact. That's troubling.