Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

SCHOOL FINANCE SYSTEM
Date:10/18/2005
ATTENDANCE
Time:09:07 AM to 03:37 PM
Anderson
X
Bacon
X
Place:SCR 356
Benefield
X
King
X
This Meeting was called to order by
Penry
*
Senator Windels
Pommer
*
Spence
*
This Report was prepared by
Tupa
*
Cathy Eslinger
Merrifield
X
Windels
X
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
Bill A
Bill B
Bill C
Bill B - Further Discussion
Bill D
Bill E
Bill F
Bill G
Bill Drafting Issues		-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

09:07 AM -- Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by the chair, Senator Windels.

09:08 AM

Senator Windels reviewed the process for considering the bill drafts.


09:08 AM -- Bill A

Representative King reviewed the provisions of Bill A, concerning special education funding (Attachment A). He requested that Carolyn Kampman, Joint Budget Committee staff, and Nicole Hoffman, Office of Legislative Legal Services, come to the table. Representative King referred to a memorandum from Carolyn Kampman that was distributed to the committee (Attachment B). Ms. Kampman reviewed the provisions of the bill. She said it would change the allocation of state funds by implementing a new formula for administrative units. She said that the new formula would be phased in so that ultimately all administrative units would receive a statewide per pupil special education funding amount.


09:12 AM

In response to a question from Senator Anderson regarding Amendment 23 requirements for increases for categorical funding, Ms. Kampman discussed special education funding as a proportion of total categorical funding. She continued to refer to data provided in the memorandum. The data shows increases in categorical funding for the past five years. Ms. Kampman said that increases in categorical funding for the past five years have totaled approximately $28 million, and that the projections for future years are based on projections made by Legislative Council Staff. She added that the bill would work toward a special pool for reimbursement for high-cost students. The students for whom school districts would be eligible for reimbursement would be those placed in residential facilities by a court or state agency or those whose education costs exceed a certain threshold.


09:22 AM


Representative King responded to questions about the potential impact of the bill on other categorical programs. He said that the bill assumes that the General Assembly will always fund categorical programs and that special education would receive 80 percent of total funding. Ms. Kampman responded to further questions about the assumptions and factors used in making the projections.


09:28 AM

Ms. Hoffman discussed the fact that the target year for the statewide funding level was set in law and would need to be changed in law if the General Assembly desired a different phase-in period. Ms. Hoffman walked through the provisions of the bill by section. She specified the process and requirements during the phase-in period during which funding would be designated according to the phase in of a statewide per pupil special education amount for each administrative unit. Administrative units would be held harmless based on funding levels in FY 2005-06. Representative Merrifield asked additional questions about the phase-in process and the "hold harmless" provision.


09:34 AM

Ms. Hoffman discussed the second component of the bill, concerning reimbursement for high-cost students. The General Assembly would designate an amount to be used for this type of reimbursement. Ms. Kampman discussed the current statutory provision for appropriating $500,000 for specified high cost students in residential facilities. The committee discussed the determinations made with funding through the required Amendment 23 increases for categorical funding and the future decisions that the General Assembly would make if the provisions of the bill were passed.


09:40 AM

Ms. Hoffman continued to discuss the bill's provisions for reimbursement for high-cost students. One group of eligible students are students placed in a residential facility through court order or other mandated placement by a public agency, and not by an administrative unit. Representative King made further comments about his proposed bill. The reimbursement level is for up to 50 percent of the tuition costs. The reimbursement level for administrative units with eligible excess costs is also 50 percent. The third component of the bill addresses eligible facilities' costs during the phase-in period for high-cost reimbursement.

09:49 AM

Representative King responded to questions about the authority given to the State Board of Education to assist with determining threshold levels and percentages of reimbursement for eligible facilities and high-cost students. Ms. Hoffman made final comments on the bill draft. Senator Anderson commented on the provisions for holding administrative units harmless. Committee members raised further questions regarding students in eligible facilities. Representative King responded to questions about current funding provisions and the goals of the bill.


09:58 AM

Senator Tupa asked further questions about the projections for the number of special education students anticipated to be addressed through the eligible facilities and high-cost student provisions. Representative King made further comments on the provisions for reimbursement.


10:01 AM

Charm Paulmeno, Colorado Department of Education, responded to questions about out-of-state placement and indicated that the number is usually about five or six students each year. Ms. Paulmeno responded to further questions and noted that the reimbursement for students in eligible facilities are limited to statutory criteria established for facilities, criteria that out-of-state facilities do not meet. Reimbursement for placement in out-of-state facilities could only be made through provisions for high-cost students.


10:06 AM

Senator Bacon discussed the manner in which certain districts would be held harmless depending on current funding levels. Ms. Kampman responded to questions and reviewed the way that special education students are currently funded. Committee discussion on these issues continued. Senator Anderson discussed the efforts to bring each administrative unit to a statewide per pupil funding level. Representative Merrifield stated that his concern was that some school districts would have to work within current funding levels for several years.


10:17 AM

Glenn Gustafson, Chief Financial Officer, Colorado Springs School District #11, came to the table to discuss the potential impact of the bill on his school district. His school district currently receives the highest level of special education funding. Mr. Gustafson noted that the bill addresses both a concept of equalization and a new policy for pooling special education costs. He said that he feels both concepts are important. Senator Anderson made further comments based on Mr. Gustafson's testimony. Mr. Gustafson responded to further questions about a school district's responsibilities in seeking reimbursement for high-cost students under the bill.



10:24 AM

Representative King discussed future flexibility to allocate money to the statewide base versus money that would be added to categorical funding. Scott Murphy, Chief Financial Officer, Littleton School District, said that he was familiar with the discussions as the bill was drafted and said that the issue for school districts was unreimbursed costs and unreimbursed costs as a percentage of a school district's total funding.


10:28 AM

Velma Rose, Chief Financial Officer, Denver Public Schools, expressed agreement with prior comments by Mr. Gustafson and Mr. Murphy. She suggested a re-examination of the program and its impact on school districts in a couple of years. Mr. Murphy made further comments on districts' unreimbursed costs. There was discussion about ongoing evaluation and looking at data over time.


10:33 AM

Represetnative King moved to refer Bill A to the Legislative Council as an interim committee recommendation.

BILL:Bill A
TIME: 10:33:45 AM
MOVED:Anderson
MOTION:Amend Bill A, to include provisions: if Referendum C passes, require that the special education pool be funded with a new revenue stream from the general fund exempt account, not from Amendment 23 (State Education Fund) moneys. Amend the bill's requirement for a report to the House and Senate Education Committees to include an in-depth analysis from the Colorado Department of Education in three years. The motion passed on a 9-1 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
No
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 9 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


10:38 AM

Julie Pelegrin, Office of Legislative Legal Services, discussed the potential for adding statutory language or whether it would be more appropriate to add an appropriations clause when the bill is introduced and when the outcome of Referendum C is known.

BILL:Bill A
TIME: 10:45:05 AM
MOVED:King
MOTION:Renewed his motion to approve Bill A, as amended, for referral to the Legislative Council as an interim committee bill. The motion passed on a 10-0 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 10 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS



10:47 AM

The committee recessed.


11:01 AM

The committee came back to order.


11:01 AM

Senator Windels asked for sponsors for Bill A. Representative King would be the prime sponsor in the House, and Senator Bacon agreed to be the prime sponsor in the Senate.

11:02 AM -- Bill B

In bringing Bill B to the committee, Representative Merrifield requested that Esther van Mourik, Office of Legislative Legal Services, come to the table as the bill drafter. Representative Merrifield discussed the provisions in Bill B, concerning a proficiency adjustment to the public school finance formula for calculating districts' total program (Attachment C). He discussed the flexibility that he feels that the bill provides for the General Assembly and for school districts. Representative Pommer discussed the possibility of having school districts report on the proficiency adjustment through the accreditation report.


11:08 AM

Senator Anderson asked why the bill was a better alternative to increasing the statewide base funding amount. She commented on the potential for increasing the base if Referendum C passes. Representative Merrifield responded to Senator Anderson's comments. Representative King raised concerns about the formula in the bill. Ms. van Mourik responded to questions to adding a new factor under Amendment 23. Ms. van Mourik stated that she feels that the bill makes it clear that the factor is not a part of the statewide base.


11:14 AM

Christy Chase, Office of Legislative Legal Services, discussed the different interpretations of requirements under Amendment 23 for increasing the statewide base and whether the required increase in the base needs to include the factors. Senator Anderson said that the proficiency adjustment concept should either establish a new category of funding or increase the statewide base. Representative Merrifield said, in response to questions, that he does not feel that the bill is contingent upon the passage of Referendum C. Representative Pommer commented on the bill. Senator Anderson argued that the proficiency funding should not be part of the school finance act formula.


11:23 AM

Representative Merrifield made further comments on the bill he was proposing. Senator Bacon said that he feels the legislative declaration recognizes that there are new mandates and new requirements being placed on school districts.

11:25 AM

Pat Steadman, representing a coalition of school districts, came to the table to comment on discussions that had been held concerning the proficiency adjustment as provided in the bill and as opposed to adding funding to the statewide base. Mr. Steadman said that he feels the bill preserves flexibility for the state and school districts. Committee discussion continued on the provisions of the bill.


11:31 AM

Representative Penry asked about the requirements for such an adjustment if it were established as a categorical. Ms. Chase responded to further questions from Representative Penry and Senator Windels. She told the committee that Amendment 23 makes requirements for increases based on total categorical program.

11:33 AM

Representative Merrifield moved to approve and recommend Bill B, as amended, to the Legislative Council as an interim committee bill.

BILL:Bill B
TIME: 11:35:27 AM
MOVED:Pommer
MOTION:Amend page 4, lines 9-24, strike and substitute subsection (2), to require that each school district shall report annually to the Colorado Department of Education on how it intends to spend the money and how it has spent the funding, to become part of the annual accreditation report. The motion passed on a 10-0 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 10 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


11:42 AM

Senator Anderson made further comments on potential funding streams and adding funding to the statewide base. Senator Tupa responded with further comments. There was committee discussion about making the provisions for a proficiency adjustment into a grant program. Representative Merrifield commented further on his goals and perceptions of the bill. Ms. van Mourik asked whether the committee wished to consider a change to the title, to read "Concerning proficiency funding for school districts."

BILL:Bill B
TIME: 11:46:12 AM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Amend Bill B to state that the proficiency adjustment shall not be funded from moneys in the State Education Fund and if Referendum C passes, shall be funded from the general fund exempt account. The motion passed on a 6-4 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
No
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
No
Penry
No
Pommer
Yes
Spence
No
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 6 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:Bill B
TIME: 11:55:06 AM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Moved to amend the title to read "Concerning proficiency funding for school districts." The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill B
TIME: 11:55:33 AM
MOVED:King
MOTION:Page 3, line 11, amend to strike "encouraged" and substitute "required". The motion failed on a 4-6 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
No
Benefield
No
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
No
Spence
Yes
Tupa
No
Merrifield
No
Windels
No
Not Final YES: 4 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:Bill B
TIME: 11:56:59 AM
MOVED:Merrifield
MOTION:Renewed his motion to approve and recommend Bill B, as amended, to the Legislative Council as an interim committee bill. The motion passed on a 6-4 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
No
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
No
Penry
No
Pommer
Yes
Spence
No
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 6 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


11:57 AM

Representative Merrifield will sponsor the bill, and Senator Tupa will sponsor the bill in the Senate.


11:58 AM

The committee recessed.


01:33 PM

The committee came back to order.


01:33 PM

Senator Windels made several announcements.
01:35 PM -- Bill C

Representative Pommer reviewed the provisions of Bill C, concerning the authorization of additional school district revenues to fund costs associated with full-day kindergarten programs (Attachment D). Representative King asked about the addition of a capital construction request in a special mill levy ballot issue. Representative King further asked questions about the relationship of the proposed bill and current provisions for mill levy overrides.


01:40 PM

Ms. Chase came to the table to respond to additional questions about conforming amendments in the bill. Senator Anderson and Representative Penry asked additional questions about the bill. There was further discussion about the likelihood of school districts going to voters under the bill's provisions.


01:45 PM

The committee continued to discuss the operating component of the bill, and the provisions for capital construction needs. Representative Pommer responded to questions about the ability of a school district to charge tuition to out-of-district kindergarten students for the second half of a day. Senator Spence asked questions about whether the revenue raised by the mill levy would be sufficient to provide for the ongoing operating costs.


01:50 PM

Ms. Chase responded to a question about the use of the term "mill levy." She explained that the term does not necessarily connote a single mill. There was discussion of the fact that the mill levy issue could be brought either by a board of education or through a citizen initiative.

01:54 PM

Representative Pommer moved to approve and recommend Bill C for referral to the Legislative Council.

BILL:Bill C
TIME: 01:54:35 PM
MOVED:Merrifield
MOTION:Page 4, lines 23-24, strike "fifty percent" and substitute "seventy percent". The amendment was withdrawn.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: TIE


BILL:Bill C
TIME: 01:55:04 PM
MOVED:Pommer
MOTION:Renewed his motion to approve and recommend Bill C for referral to the Legislative Council. The motion passed on a 10-0 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 10 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS



01:56 PM

With Representative Pommer the prime House sponsor, Senator Bacon agreed to sponsor the bill in the Senate.

01:57 PM -- Bill B

Representative Merrifield returned to a discussion of Bill B. Ms. van Mourik returned to the table to discuss the title that had been approved by the committee earlier in the meeting and suggested a change to the title. She explained that the title that had been approved earlier in the meeting could limit the ability of institute charter schools to obtain the proficiency adjustment.
BILL:Bill B - Further Discussion
TIME: 01:58:12 PM
MOVED:Merrifield
MOTION:Move to reconsider committee action on Bill B. The motion was passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill B - Further Discussion
TIME: 01:59:04 PM
MOVED:Merrifield
MOTION:Moved Bill B for approval with an amendment to the title "Proficiency Funding for K-12 Education". The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill B - Further Discussion
TIME: 02:00:05 PM
MOVED:Merrifield
MOTION:Moved to readopt Bill B for approval by the committee as an interim committee recommendation to the Legislative Council. The motion passed on a 6-4 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
No
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
No
Penry
No
Pommer
Yes
Spence
No
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 6 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


02:02 PM -- Bill D

Ms. van Mourik returned to the table to review Bill D, concerning state school lands (Attachment E). The bill was requested by Senator Windels. Ms. van Mourik discussed the provision that all moneys earned from the management of state school lands, including interest earned on the public school lands and proceeds received by the state for mineral leases, land surface leases, and timber sales on said lands, be deposited into the Public School Fund and treated as principal. She indicated that the bill would grow the corpus of the Public School Fund toward a specified amount. If Colorado personal income grows less than four and one-half percent, current triggers for using expenditures of up to $19 million of interest earned on the fund and of up to $12 million of proceeds received for mineral leases, land surface leases, and timber sales would apply.

02:06 PM

Senator Anderson requested that the committee find out how much was currently in the Public School Fund. Senator Windels responded to questions, and Senator Anderson said that she has long supported attempting to grow the Public School Fund. Representative Penry said that a critical question is how much revenue the General Assembly wishes to generate through the corpus.


02:08 PM

Ben Stein, Deputy State Treasurer, came to the table to respond to questions raised earlier. He indicated $407 million is the current balance of the Public School Fund. The committee discussed the additional investment authority contemplated for the State Treasurer in order to grow the corpus. Mr. Stein explained the potential interest rates depending on the types and durations of investments sought.


02:12 PM

Mr. Stein responded to further questions regarding the different characteristics of the Public School Fund and the State Education Fund. He discussed investment strategies that have been utilized for the two funds. Representative King raised concerns regarding the provisions for an "aggregate loss of principal" and what occurs in such instances. Mr. Stein made further explanation about the use of realized values, securities that are carried at cost, and explained that the use of realized values makes a loss unlikely.

02:19 PM

Representative Penry inquired about the provisions for limiting the use of the Public School Fund in times of economic downturn, specifically utilizing the current provision for using up to $19 million in interest. Representative Penry asked whether the potential for more flexibility provides a reason to have a higher limit, while Senator Anderson advocated retaining a narrower limit. Mr. Stein reminded the committee that a more aggressive investment strategy may result in less interest income during certain periods.


02:25 PM

Ms. van Mourik continued walking through the provisions of the bill, and specifically discussed the limits on the types of investments that the Treasurer may make. Several "clean up" provisions are included in the bill, according to Ms. van Mourik. Senator Anderson asked questions regarding amendments to conform language to reflect the constitutional term, "Public School Fund," rather than the Permanent School Fund. Mr. Stein said that it would be helpful to have specific targets in conjunction with the direction in the bill. Representative Penry asked whether a duration of time or a dollar target may be more helpful. Mr. Stein responded that a dollar target may be helpful.

2:34 PM

Senator Windels moved to approve Bill D, as amended, as a recommendation to the Legislative Council.

BILL:Bill D
TIME: 02:35:37 PM
MOVED:Anderson
MOTION:Page 4, line 2, insert, "$2 billion, 350 million". The motion passed on a 9-1 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
No
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 9 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:Bill D
TIME: 02:35:59 PM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Renewed her motion to approve Bill D, as amended, as a recommendation to the Legislative Council. The motion passed on a 10-0 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 10 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


2:35 PM

Senator Windels is the Senate prime sponsor of the bill, and Representative Penry agreed to be the House sponsor of Bill D.

2:35 PM -- Bill E

Senator Windels brought Bill E before the committee and indicated that Bill E is primarily a "clean up" bill for charter school provisions, with very little in regard to new substance (Attachment F). Julie Pelegrin, Office of Legislative Legal Services, walked the committee through the provisions of Bill E and indicated that there would be a potential amendment for the committee to consider. She said that the goal was to align and clarify terms for an accounting school district and to clarify at-risk funding for qualifying school districts. The bill relocates provisions concerning funding, administrative overhead costs, and the purchase of services for specified charter schools.


02:47 PM

Ms. Pelegrin reviewed provisions for a potential amendment, L.001, which was provided to the committee (Attachment G). She said that the amendment clarifies the application of "central administrative overhead costs" for district charter schools. There was discussion about the differences in provisions for overhead costs for the charter school institute and for the central administrative overhead costs for school districts.


2:51 PM

Senator Windels moved to approve Bill E, as amended, as a recommendation to the Legislative Council.

BILL:Bill E
TIME: 02:51:39 PM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Moved amendment .001. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill E
TIME: 02:53:25 PM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Renewed her motion to approve Bill E, as amended, as a recommendation to the Legislative Council. The motion passed on a 9-1 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
No
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 9 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:Bill E
TIME: 02:54:21 PM
MOVED:King
MOTION:Having voted on the prevailing side, moved to reconsider action on Bill E. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill E
TIME: 02:54:43 PM
MOVED:King
MOTION:Moved to amend the title, after "Concerning", insert "technical revisions to". The motion passed on a 7-3 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
No
Spence
Yes
Tupa
No
Merrifield
No
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 7 NO: 3 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:Bill E
TIME: 02:56:05 PM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Moved to readopt Bill E, as amended. The motion passed on a 9-1 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Yes
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
Yes
Penry
Yes
Pommer
No
Spence
Yes
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 9 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS



02:57 PM

With Senator Windels as the prime Senate sponsor of Bill E, Representative King agreed to be the House sponsor.

02:57 PM -- Bill F

Senator Anderson indicated that she would withdraw Bill F from consideration by the committee (Attachment H). This bill concerned the imposition of a new requirement that each public school district in the state levy the numer of mills necessary to ensure that the percentage of the local share of total program for such district remains the same as it was in the prior year.

02:57 PM -- Bill G

Senator Tupa reviewed the provisions of Bill G, concerning the study of an education system ranging from preschool through higher education, and, in connection therewith, creating a legislative oversight committee and special council (Attachment I). He indicated that the Governor has also convened a council to study K-16 issues, which includes several members of the interim committee. Senator Tupa said that he feels that the Governor's Education Alignment Council will be largely focused on the transition from high school to college. Senator Tupa said that he hoped that the council created in Bill G could be more comprehensive study.


03:01 PM

Jane Ritter, Office of Legislative Legal Services, walked the committee through the provisions of the bill. She responded to questions as to the potential timeline if the bill were passed. Senator Tupa said that his goal would be have the council meet during 2006 in order to have recommendations for the 2007 session. He said that he hoped that early childhood development issues, including issues all though elementary and secondary education could be included in the work established through Bill G. Senator Windels indicated that she also feels that Bill G addresses different issues than the Governor's council. Senator Spence commented on the potential for the Governor's alignment council to address the issues being raised by the committee. Senator Spence voiced concern about overlap and the time required to serve on different councils.



03:09 PM

Senator Tupa responded to Senator Spence's comments. He indicated his goals for his bill. Senator Anderson said that more in-depth research needs to be done, rather than necessarily establishing a new study council. Senator Tupa said he sees the importance of looking at issues around early childhood development through a study council.



03:14 PM

Senator Tupa responded to further questions about funding the study. Senator Spence asked about narrowing the focus of his bill. Senator Windels said that she feels the provisions in Bill G could carry on some of the work done by the Governor's Education Alignment Council. Representative Merrifield said that he feels that the respective memberships of the council in Bill G and of the Governor's council are very different. The committee continued its discussion.




03:21 PM

Representative Penry raised additional issues regarding duplication in the process. Senator Tupa made further comments in support of Bill G.

03:24 PM

Senator Tupa Moved to approve Bill G as an interim committee recommendation to be referred to the Legislative Council.

BILL:Bill G
TIME: 03:24:35 PM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Moved to amend the bill to strike the term "preschool" throughout the bill and substitute the term "pre-kindergarten" throughout the bill. The motion passed on a 7-3 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
No
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
No
Penry
Yes
Pommer
Yes
Spence
No
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Not Final YES: 7 NO: 3 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:Bill G
TIME: 03:26:37 PM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Amend page 8, lines 21-22, strike "one" and substitute "two members who represent organizations working to improve early childhood and school readiness, including the Early Childhood and School Readiness Commission" and line 23, strike "four" substitute "three".
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill G
TIME: 03:28:18 PM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Page 8, strike lines 5 and 6 and substitute "(I) One member from the State Board of Education or who represents the Colorado Department of Education;". The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill G
TIME: 03:28:20 PM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Page 8, strike lines 16-18 and substitute "Colorado, including one from a research institution, one from a state college, and one from the community college system." The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:Bill G
TIME: 03:30:54 PM
MOVED:Tupa
MOTION:Renewed his motion to approve Bill G, as amended, as an interim bill recommended to the Legislative Council. The motion passed on a 6-4 roll call vote.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
No
Bacon
Yes
Benefield
Yes
King
No
Penry
No
Pommer
Yes
Spence
No
Tupa
Yes
Merrifield
Yes
Windels
Yes
Final YES: 6 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


03:31 PM

With Senator Tupa the prime Senate sponsor, Representative Merrifield agreed to be the House sponsor.

03:33 PM -- Bill Drafting Issues

Senator Windels said that she was considering reconvening the committee, depending on the outcome of the November 1 election. Ms. Chase returned to the table to request permission for staff from the Office of Legislative Legal Services to make technical changes to the bills if necessary.

BILL:Bill Drafting Issues
TIME: 03:33:45 PM
MOVED:Windels
MOTION:Moved to allow the Office of Legislative Legal Services to make technical changes, as necessary, to the interim bills. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
VOTE
Anderson
Bacon
Benefield
King
Penry
Pommer
Spence
Tupa
Merrifield
Windels
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


03:34 PM

Senator Windels asked for co-sponsors on the six bill referred to the Legislative Council. She requested that members indicate the bills on which they do not wish to be a co-sponsor:

Bill A - Senator Spence, Representative Merrifield, Representative Pommer, Representative Penry, and Senator Tupa are not co-sponsors.
Bill B - Senator Anderson, Representative King, Senator Spence, and Representative Penry are not co-sponsors.
Bill C - Senator Spence and Representative Penry are not co-sponsors.
Bill D - All members are co-sponsors.
Bill E - Senator Anderson, Representative Pommer, Senator Spence, and Senator Tupa are not co-sponsors.
Bill G - Senator Anderson, Representative King, Representative Penry, and Senator Spence are not co-sponsors.


03:37 PM

The committee adjourned.