Last year two Republicans, Reps. Tom Massey of Poncha Springs and Robert Ramirez of Westminster, joined Democrats to kill House Bill 11-1270. That plan would have allowed a bare majority of families at a low-performing school to petition their local school board to close the school or convert it to a charter or innovation school. A school board would have had limited grounds for rejecting an appeal, and a rejection could have been appealed to the State Board of Education.

This year’s bill, also sponsored by Rep. Don Beezley, R-Broomfield, is milder. It would authorize the parents of students enrolled in a school with a priority improvement or turnaround plan for two consecutive years to submit a petition to the SBE requesting the school be reconfigured. The state accountability system is set up for the SBE to take action on such schools after five years on either accreditation status. Schools are rated annually and required to file improvement plans.

The parent petition would have to be signed by more than 50 percent of the families of the students at the school. The state board could deny the petition, direct an action to take effect in the next school year or reconsider the petition in the next school year.

Beezley pitched the bill to the committee as a plan that fits within the accountability system.

“Help me offer a little bit of hope … to parents with children in some of our lowest performing schools,” Beezley said.

Committee Democrats quizzed Beezley about why local school boards weren’t part of the process and about details of the parent petition process, such as who would verify signatures.

Rep. Don Beezley, R-Broomfield / File photo

Michelle Murphy, a staff lawyer for the Colorado Association of School Boards, testified against the bill, saying, “We do feel strongly about this bill; we oppose this bill.”

She added, “This bill allows a parent group to sidestep and potentially derail” a school improvement plan. Existing law “provides for parent input on numerous occasions and strong state oversight.”

Julie Whitacre, a lobbyist for the Colorado Education Association, also opposed the bill, saying the idea is good but her group has concerns with the details.

Vinny Badolato, lobbyist the Colorado League of Charter Schools, and Denver parent Nola Miguel, representing Metropolitan Organizations for People, testified in support.

“It injects some parent rights into the process,” said Badolato, adding that such a process could be helpful to improving the quality of charter schools.

Miguel said the current five-year turnaround process is “way too long.”

Whitacre said, “A lot of studies have shown that turnarounds need more than three years.”

The bill goes next to the House Appropriations Committee, because a legislative staff analysis has estimated it could cost the Department of Education about $23,000 a year to handle the parent appeals (see fiscal note). Some 105 schools currently are on priority improvement or turnaround status. The state accreditation system has gone through two years of school ratings.

If the bill passes the House, its prospects in the Senate are uncertain, given that chamber’s Democratic majority and expected lobbying efforts by CASB and other mainline education groups.

New bills

Three new education-related bills were introduced Monday.

House Bill 12-1235 would schools built in 2013 or later to meet certain energy efficiency standards. House prime sponsor Rep. Andy Kerr, D-Lakewood, has unsuccessfully tried variations of this bill before.

House Bill 12-1225 would establish a model charter school authorizer program under which schools districts could apply to be model authorizers. If designated as such by the Department of Education, decisions by such districts on charter applications would carry an additional presumption of validity in appeals to the State Board of Education.

The bill is sponsored by the unlikely due of Rep. Robert Ramirez, R-Westminster, and Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver.

House Bill 12-1227 would authorize the state community college system to design a certificate program through which students who are identified as needing basic skills remedial course work or who are eligible for adult literacy education may obtain a career and technical education certificate within 12 months.

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.

MONDAY

7:30 a.m. – House Appropriations Committee, room LSB-A
- Consideration of bills making adjustments to 2011-12 budget, including for the departments of education and higher education
- House Bill 12-1201 – Adjustments in current year school funding

10 a.m. – House preliminary consideration
- House Bill 12-1061 – Requirement for annual report on alignment of workforce needs and college programs
- House Bill 12-1090 – Handling conflicts between enrollment count date and religious holidays

10 a.m. – Senate preliminary consideration
- Senate Bill 12-015 – Separate tuition rate for undocumented students (may be held over)
- Senate Bill 12-079 – Revisions to Safe2tell program

1:30 p.m. – House Education Committee, room 0112
- House Bill 12-1212 – Change in reimbursement for BOCES online programs
- House Bill 12-1149 – Modified parent trigger bill
- House Bill 12-1218 – Reauthorization of early childhood commission

WEDNESDAY

8 a.m. – Joint education committees, room 0112
- Briefings by Donnell-Kay Foundation and CDE

Upon floor adjournment – House Education Committee, room 0112
- House Bill 12-1043 – Creation of additional concurrent enrollment program
- House Bill 12-1072 – College credit for life experience
- Strategic plan recommendations for departments of education and higher education

Upon floor adjournment – Senate Education Committee, room 354
- Senate Bill 12-145 – Capping current year transfers from state lands revenues
- Senate Bill 12 – Changes in authorization and revocation procedures for charter schools
- House Bill 12-1001 – Ratification of educator evaluation regulations

1:30 p.m. – House Finance Committee, room LSB-A
- House Bill 12-1069 – Tax holiday for back-to-school purchases (second item)

THURSDAY

Upon floor adjournment – Senate Finance Committee, room 354
- Senate Bill 12-119 – PERA fiscal sustainability (first bill)
- Senate Bill 12-082 – PERA retirement eligibility age

1:30 p.m. – House Judiciary Committee, room 0107
- House Bill 12-1092 – Change in law on carrying concealed weapons, including on college campuses (third item)

1:30 p.m. – Senate Education Committee, room 354
- Senate Bill 12-036 – Parent consent for school surveys
- Senate Bill 12-045 – “Reverse transfer” of credits for AA degree
- Senate Bill 12-067 – Non-profit requirement for charter schools
- Senate Bill 12-106 – Expansion of authority for early colleges

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.

Subscribe to the Capitol eNewsletter to receive calendar updates every weekday evening.

Auraria Higher Education Center, home of Metro State

The proposal now goes to the legislature, which must approve changes in college and university names, because those names are sprinkled throughout state law. Denver Democrats Sen. Lucia Guzman and Rep. Crisanta Duran are expected to sponsor the bill.

“What was most important to me was to increase the value of degrees for students today and all alumni and students into the future,” said Metro President Stephen Jordan. “It reinforces our heritage; it makes a clear stake in the ground who we are. We are Metro State. We are the Roadrunners.”

Metro has been working for a couple of years on a name change, which trustees felt was important to clarify the college’s image as a full-service academic institution. (Metro now offers some master’s degrees.)

There was wide agreement about changing “college” to “university.” But there was vigorous campus debate about keeping “Metropolitan” in the name, where the word “Denver” should appear and how long the name should be.

Last year the trustees proposed the name Denver State University, but that plan never surfaced in the legislature because of opposition from the private University of Denver.

It was back to the drawing board, and back to negotiations with DU, partially brokered by Democratic Sens. Mike Johnston of Denver and Rollie Heath of Boulder.

The proposed new name is accompanied by a “coexistence agreement” with DU that will govern how the two institutions brand and present their names. Under the agreement, hammered out over five negotiating sessions, Metro agrees not to infringe on DU’s established trademarks or use terms in future marketing and branding efforts.

DU agrees to Metro’s use of the new name and that it won’t oppose Metro’s efforts to win legislative approval or seek trademark protection for the new name.

Two trustees, Melody Harris and Michelle Lucero, said they voted no because they felt the coexistence agreement wasn’t in Metro’s best interests and was too limiting. Board chair Rob Cohen also voted no, expressing concerns that the board had backed down on its full set of goals for the new name.

But, after the vote, Cohen urged the trustees to unite behind the new name and promised to work for its approval by the legislature.

Other names that had been considered earlier were Denver Metropolitan State University, Denver State Metropolitan University and Metropolitan Denver State University. (Get more information on the name change effort.)

Last year the legislature turned Mesa State College into Colorado Mesa University, and legislation is already pending this year to covert Adams State College to Adams State University. Western State College also is studying a possible new name (more information). The issue is listed as a discussion item for the trustees’ Feb. 10 meeting.

If Metro, Adams and Western win name change approval, the only four-year “college” left in the state system will be Fort Lewis in Durango.

Meanwhile at the Capitol

Thursday in the legislature was most notable for what didn’t happen with education legislation.

Senate Bill 12-068, the proposal to ban use of trans fats in any foods served at schools, was pulled off the calendar of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

The Senate Education Committee approved a couple of minor bills, including Senate Bill 12-051, which would encourage school districts to consider new kinds of guidelines for outside contracts. The always-talkative members of Senate Ed managed to chew on that bill for an hour.

The Senate Finance Committee voted 4-3 (Democrats opposing, Republicans supporting) to kill Senate Bill 12-061, which would have diverted some state severance tax revenues to create a fund for rural colleges.

Members of the Joint Budget Committee were at the center of the discussion on testing costs. Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, is third from left.

Members of the House and Senate education committees sat down with the Joint Budget Committee Wednesday morning to talk about testing costs. The session was held under the new SMART Government Act and legislative rules that encourage other committees to give the JBC formal advice on departmental budgets.

“There are some significant decision items pending here,” said JBC member Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver. “I would feel better if you would help us on the policy decisions,” he added a few minutes later.

Education policymakers have been wrestling with testing costs since November, when CDE formally filed a request for $25.9 million in 2012-13 to pay for development of new statewide tests to replace the CSAPs, to launch social studies tests and to help create interim and formative tests to be given to students throughout the school year.

But Gov. John Hickelooper didn’t include the $25.9 million in his overall budget request, leading to legislative questions about just what the executive branch wants. Administration officials – and some key legislators like Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver – have said Colorado should wait for multistate reading and math tests expected to be ready in 2014-15.

The consortia “really are building the Ferrari version of this assessment,” Johnston said Wednesday. “Our own version is probably not going to have all the bells and whistles.”

“I understand you had some interesting discussions among yourselves,” Steadman said, referring to recent separate meetings of the education committees at which members vented and expressed confusion about testing costs and some other CDE budget items.

Wednesday’s joint session was more orderly than the two recent meetings, and members seemed to have a better grasp of the issues.

Rep. Robert Ramirez, R-Westminster, led the criticism of both testing costs and educator evaluation costs during a House Education session on Monday. “I went a little rabid on CDE a little earlier in the week,” Ramirez said Wednesday. Saying he was “eating a little crow,” Ramirez said, “I feel they [CDE] have given a lot of valid information” about cost issues.

As the discussion wound down, Steadman said, “We don’t have consensus and we have a lot of choices,” but he added, “This has been a very helpful discussion.”

Several members did seem to be in general agreement that Colorado should participate in the multistate tests but that some money should be set aside to start development on new social studies and science tests, which aren’t part of the systems being developed by the multistate consortia.

Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen and chair of the JBC, said the committee is hoping to find $7 million for that.

Some lawmakers sounded cautionary notes. Rep. Judy Solano, D-Brighton and the legislature’s foremost critic of standardized testing, said, “We are going down a very expensive road here.” Rep. Sue Schafer, D-Wheat Ridge, wondered if the state could save some money by taking a one-year test moratorium on all exams except reading and math.

Count date bill advances

House Education did a little real business later in the morning, voting 13-0 to pass House Bill 12-1090, which would move the Oct. 1 student count date in years that it falls on a religious holiday.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Sal Pace, D-Pueblo, was prompted by a problem last year when Oct. 1 fell on a Saturday, pushing the count date back to Sept. 30. That was the Jewish observance of Rosh Hashanah.

“There are concerns when we’re doing count day on a major religious holiday,” Pace told the committee. The bill would move count day to the next regular school day after Oct. 1 if a religious holiday coincides with that date.

The state allows a window of five school days on either side of Oct. 1 to count children who are absent on count day. Some committee members asked if that provided a way to avoid the problem without changing the law, but by the end of the hearing everyone agreed the bill was needed.

For the record

The House gave unanimous final approval Wednesday to House Bill 12-1013, which encourages school districts to provide help for middle school students who show risk factors for dropping out, and to House Bill 12-1018, which gives the Auraria Higher Education Center exemption from some state financial and administrative procedures.

Here are snapshots of the latest proposals:

Senate Bill 12-130 – The measure would create an Office of Early Childhood and Youth Development in the state Department of Human Services, consolidating oversight of several programs now part of various agencies.

An initiative of the Hickenlooper administration and a legislative study group, the bill is seen as a first step in improving the quality of early childhood programs and making better use of existing funding. The administration had hoped to pay for faster improvements with a Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge grant, but Colorado didn’t make the cut in that competition.

A report on early childhood initiatives, compiled from a statewide “listening tour” late last year, is expected this month from the office of Lt. Gov. Joe Garcia.

Senate Bill 12-145 – This plan, sponsored by the Joint Budget Committee, would clamp down on the recent practice of funneling revenue from state school trust lands into the annual School Finance Act, rather than letting the money flow into what’s called the permanent fund. (Only interest from the permanent fund can be spent.) Because school land revenue has helped soften, at least slightly, recent school budget cuts, this bill may raise concerns for some lawmakers and lobbyists.

Senate Bill 12-106 – Sponsored by Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs, the bill would add college remediation rates to the performance indicators used to rate school districts and high schools. The measure also would add early colleges to the list of institutions that have a guaranteed transfer of core course credits to public colleges. Accredited early colleges would be given the authority to award degrees.

Colorado has only a few early college programs, which are kind of a hybrid high school and community college. King is the administrator of Colorado Springs Early Colleges, a charter school overseen by the state Charter School Institute. King, who’s not running for reelection this year, is a tireless evangelist for the concept and says he wants to replicate it in Douglas County and Fort Collins.

(Of concern to some lobbyists is the fact that the bill has an extremely broad title – “Concerning Education.” That would allow any number of amendments on any number of subjects to be added. King’s nickname in the legislature is “the Amendment King.”)

Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs

The bill also proposes multiple changes in law regarding the charter institute schools, including a provision allowing the institute to authorize charter schools within school districts that are accredited with turnaround plans. (Current law only allows the institute to approve schools in districts that do not have exclusive chartering authority.) The bill also would give the institute greater financial flexibility.

Senate Bill 12-103 – Sponsored by Sen. Bacon, D-Fort Collins and chair of the Senate Education Committee, the bill would change some of the accounting procedures between school districts and their charters that involve numbers of at-risk students. Charters get different reimbursement rates now based on when they opened. The bill would create a a uniform rate. Bacon is the sole sponsor for now, and the bill will be opposed by charter advocates.

Senate Bill 12-119 – This is the seventh bill relating to the Public Employees’ Retirement Association that has been introduced by various Republican sponsors. It would require the PERA board to adjust retiree benefits to ensure that each of PERA’s divisions remain on 30-year amortization schedules. (Benefits could be adjusted by individual division.)

The legislature would be barred from increasing employee and employer contributions in order to meet amortization schedules. PERA, which covers all Colorado teachers and many higher education employees, and how it operates are major targets for legislative Republicans.

But not radical changes are expected to survive in the Democratic controlled Senate. On Monday Senate Bill 12-016, which would have allowed some local governments to decrease their PERA contributions while requiring employees to kick in more, was killed by a Senate committee.

There was a large dump of bills in the House on Monday, including House Bill 12-1201, a JBC bill that increases 2011-12 school funding by about $18 million to cover the costs of higher-than-predicted enrollment. The increase would be covered by local tax revenues, which didn’t decline as much as predicted, and state support actually will be cut back slightly.

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information. As of Tuesday the Tracker included 57 bills affecting schools and colleges or of interest to the education community.

What’s still to come

Last Friday was the deadline for introduction of bills in the Senate (obviously that got extended), and Wednesday is the House deadline.

Deadlines are flexible things in the Colorado legislature, given what’s known as “late bill status,” a designation awarded by legislative leadership for a variety of reasons, some practical and some political.

Bills have yet to be introduced on such key issues as regulation of online schools, school finance reform, revenue adjustments for the BEST program, updating the Innovation Schools Act, improving third-grade literacy, modernizing regulation of for-profit colleges and mandatory parent notification when school employees are arrested.

It’s possible some of those bills will surface on Wednesday’s House deadline.

Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs / File photo

Early drafts of the legislation suggested mandatory retention of third graders who were functionally illiterate, an idea that caused a lot of heartburn among educators. The bill reportedly will require parents, teachers and principals to consider whether struggling third graders should be held back, and for superintendents to approve a student being retained in grade.

Other bills may not surface for weeks. For instance, Johnston says his school finance reform measure won’t be ready until mid to late February at the earliest.

Mostly slow going for minor bills

The House on Tuesday spent half an hour on three low-level education bills and approved two of them.

House Bill 12-1013 is a purely advisory measure that urges school districts to provide intervention services for middle school students that show risk factors for dropping out. But discussion got drawn out a bit over an amendment that proposed to add “restorative justice” to the list of suggested interventions. The amendment was defeated, and the bill got preliminary approval.

Things got stickier with House Bill 12-1061, which would require the Department of Higher Education to work with other state agencies to produce an annual report on state workforce needs and how they match up with the kinds of degrees and certificates produced by the state higher education system.

Sponsor Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Englewood, is promoting the bill as a jobs measure, and House Democrats have touted it as part of their economic development package.

Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock

And Rep. Don Beezley, R-Broomfield, said, “We’re doing something that sounds kind of good … but ultimately will it achieve anything?”

The bill ended up being laid over because of confusion over whether it would cost anything and thereby require the dreaded “fiscal note,” a legislative staff analysis of potential costs. Bills with fiscal notes attached end up being assigning to the appropriations committee, where they can languish for weeks.

The House did take only about a minute to give a preliminary OK to House Bill 12-1081, a catch-up measure that would give the Auraria Higher Education Center the same financial and administrative flexibility that has been granted to state colleges and universities in recent years.

Rep. Robert Ramirez, R-Westminster

The discussion is by no means over and could resume as early as Wednesday.

The unusual session was sparked, at least indirectly, by the SMART Government Act, a new law that allows all legislative committees to make recommendations to the Joint Budget Committee about the budgets of relevant state departments. (So the two education committees can make recommendations about the departments of education and higher education, and other committees make them for other agencies.)

The agenda for Monday afternoon’s House Ed meeting was devoted solely to that SMART Act assignment, prompting a free-form discussion and complaint session of the kind that usually doesn’t happen during a normal committee meeting, when members have bills to consider and parliamentary procedure to follow.

Chair Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs, opened by telling his colleagues they were “under no obligation” to make formal recommendations. “We can just punt this back to the JBC and tell them to take care of it.”

Panel members took him at his word – no formal motions were offered – but the chatter made clear what some members think about two key issues – the $25.9 million cost of designing a new state testing system and $7.7 million in proposed spending for implementing the new educator effectiveness and evaluation system.

Part of the discomfort is sparked by the fact that the executive branch is sending mixed signals on those two issues. The State Board of Education and CDE have asked for the $25.9 million, but Gov. John Hickenlooper doesn’t want to spend the money. The governor, in turn, asked for the $7.7 million. But that wasn’t part of CDE’s formal 2012-13 request, although the department supports Hickenlooper.

“Those interested persons should get together,” said Rep. Judy Solano, D-Brighton and a longtime critic of the state testing system. “I think there needs to be more discussion” within the executive branch.

Other committee members agreed with her, but Massey noted gently that the costs and timing of multi-state tests, the alternative to buying a Colorado-only set of tests, are unknown.

The discussion detoured into a round of test bashing before Rep. Robert Ramirez, R-Westminster, took aim at the $7.7 million request for implementation of the education evaluation system.

(To add to the confusion, there are various amounts of money in play here. CDE wants about $425,000 in 2012-13 to continue paying current staffers who are working on the program. There’s Hickenlooper’s $7.7 million ask. And the state recently won a $17.9 million federal Race to the Top grant that will be split between CDE and school districts to help implement the evaluation system.)

“The money is really beyond what’s necessary,” said Ramirez, citing his experience as a corporate trainer to stress the project could be done for a lot less money. “I just really think they’re going about it the wrong way.”

“There’s got to be more discussion about the cost of implementing,” chimed in Solano.

“Just because we got the [R2T] money it doesn’t mean we have to spend it all,” Ramirez said.

Jill Hawley, Colorado Department of Education

CDE lobbyist Anne Barkis, cell phone in hand, left the room, and 10 minutes late Jill Hawley, department policy chief, showed up with her arms full of binders and settled in at the witness table.

“At this point we’ll let Miss Hawley be grilled,” said a smiling Massey.

Hawley, composed and smiling herself, launched into a detailed explanation of how the R2T money will be used for creating key elements of the evaluation system that can be used by districts. The $7.7 million will be needed for outreach to and training in school districts, she said.

Ramirez listened intently but didn’t seem convinced. He said the funding was “a lot of top-heavy money in terms of directors, executive directors and office space. … This can be done a lot less expensively,” throwing out an estimate of $700,000.

“It’s complicated,” Hawley offered.

Rep. Millie Hamner, D-Summit County and a former superintendent there, said, “The implementation is a huge cultural shift” for schools, “So I’m not surprised it’s going to take time and money.”

The back-and-forth continued with a discussion about whether the legislature was uninformed or misinformed about costs when it passed SB 10-191, but Hawley finally was able to escape after about 45 minutes of grilling.

“Thank you for jumping into the fire,” said Hamner.

Things may warm up again on Wednesday morning, when the House and Senate education committees have a previously scheduled session with CDE leaders to talk about implementation of various recent reform initiatives.

That session will be followed later in the morning when the two committees are scheduled to meet with JBC members to talk about the SMART Act.

Members of Senate Education had their own problems with the SMART Act and testing costs at a meeting late last week (see item).

Although the budget requests from the Hickenlooper administration and CDE have been public since last Nov. 1, and the department has provide extensive briefing papers about its plans, Monday’s meeting made clear that the department has a more to do to bring lawmakers up to speed.

For the record

Speaking of the educator effectiveness law, the House Monday gave 64-1 final approval to House Bill 12-1001, which ratifies the regulations issued by the state board to implement SB 10-191. The bill has generated zero controversy in the legislature. The only no vote was Rep. Ed Casso, D-Adams County.

MONDAY

10 a.m. – House final consideration
- House Bill 12-1001 – Ratification of educator evaluation regulations

House preliminary consideration
- House Bill 12-1013 – Services for at-risk middle school students
- House Bill 12-1061 – Annual reports on workforce needs and higher education programs
- House Bill 12-1081 – Operations of Auraria Higher Education Center

Noon – Joint education committees
- Tour of Hope Online learning academy in northeast Denver

1:30 p.m. – House Education Committee, room 0112
- Budgetary recommendations for departments of education and higher education

TUESDAY

8:30 a.m. – Legislative Audit Committee, LSB-A
- School construction report

9 a.m. – Senate preliminary consideration
- Senate Bill 12-015 – Tuition rates for undocumented students

Upon floor adjournment – House Economic and Business Development Committee, room 0112
- House Bill 12-1059 – Professional licensing exemption for military spouses

2 p.m. – Senate Local Government Committee, room 353
- Senate Bill 12-079 – Revisions to Safe2tell program (second item)

WEDNESDAY

7:30 a.m. – Joint education committees, room 0112
- Continued discussion with CDE officials on implementation of reform programs

Upon floor adjournment – Joint education committees, room 0112
- Discussion of SMART Government Act with JBC members

Upon adjournment of joint meeting – House Education Committee, room 0112
- House Bill 12-1090 – Ban on enrollment counts on religious holidays

THURSDAY

Upon floor adjournment – Senate Agriculture Committee, room 353
- Senate Bill 12-068 – Ban on trans fats in school foods (third item)

Upon floor adjournment – Senate Finance Committee, room 354
- Senate Bill 12-063 – Dedicated revenues for rural colleges

1:30 p.m. – Senate Education Committee, room 354
- Senate Bill 12-051 – Licensing requirements for indigenous language instruction
- Senate Bill 12-040 – Eligibility of colleges for state maintenance funding
- Senate Bill 12-051 – Contracting guidelines for school districts

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.

The bill would create a new level of tuition at state colleges and universities for undocumented students, an amount higher than resident tuition but below rates for out-of-state students. It’s the sixth time in the last several years such a bill has been considered by the legislature.

The emotional, nearly three-hour hearing was the top event of a busy statehouse day for education issues, including contribution limits for school board candidates, teacher and public employee pensions and education effectiveness regulations.

Same kind of testimony, same result

The result wasn’t in doubt – four Democrats voted yes and three Republicans voted no – but SB 12-015 got a full hearing in Senate Education Thursday afternoon.

Cosponsor Sen. Angela Giron, D-Pueblo, led off the session, saying, “We believe that we can’t and must not permit another generation of young immigrants to struggle” in order to go to college.

Proponents of the idea want to make it easier for undocumented students who’ve been successful in high school to be able to go to college at prices they can afford. Supporters of the idea also argue that it would help the state’s economy and increase tuition revenue for state colleges.

From left: Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver; student Laura Serrano; Sen. Angela Giron, D-Pueblo

For instance, annual standard tuition at Metro State would be $6,694, compared to $4,834 for residents and $15,690 for out-of-state students. Undocumented students would not be eligible for College Opportunity Fund stipends (basically a tuition discount for state residents) or for state financial aid. The bill also would allow individual colleges to decide whether to offer the standard tuition or not. (See this legislative staff analysis for more details on the bill and how many students might be affected.)

The hearing, played out before a standing-room-only crowd, featured a familiar cast of students and business leaders supporting the bill and a small group of anti-immigration activists opposing it.

One of the more compelling witnesses in favor was Laura Serrano, an Aurora Central High School senior and native of El Salvador who came to Colorado at age 7.

“My only dream is to go to college,” she said, explaining that while she’s in the U.S. legally through a work permit, she’s not a resident for purposes of in-state tuition. Serrano said she’s been accepted at Fort Hays State University in Kansas – at resident rates – but wants to stay in Colorado to help support her family.

The fact that most neighboring states offer attractive tuition rates to undocumented students came up repeatedly during the hearing. “They’re intentionally poaching our students because we won’t let them go to college” at affordable rates, said Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver and a bill cosponsor. (Johnston did much of the talking during the hearing, while Giron appeared close to tears during much of the session. Several witnesses and committee member Sen. Evie Hudak, D-Westminster, also got weepy at times.)

The most articulate opposition witness was Pauline Olvera, a board member of the Colorado Hispanic Republicans. Her sometimes-acid comments included remarks like the bill “is an insult to immigrants who came here legally” and the suggestion that undocumented students should go back to their parents’ home countries to get higher education.

Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial

Johnston, who’s usually passionate but polite, got exercised by some of the criticisms, including Olvera’s contention that undocumented students just need to be tenacious in pursuing higher education despite high costs. He cited the story of a former student of his who returned to Mexico, despite threats on his life by drug cartels, to await determination of his immigration status. “I don’t think you can tell me with a straight face that child lacks tenacity.”

On the issue of whether children should suffer for the immigration law violations of the parents, Johnston cited the somewhat jarring example of murderer and death row inmate Sir Mario Owens, saying Owens’ children wouldn’t be barred from lower tuition just because of their father’s crime.

Things got a little testy late in the hearing, as King questioned the fiscal note produced by legislative analyst Josh Abram and Renfroe objected hotly to use of the word “stupid” by Sen. Rollie Heath, D-Boulder. Heath, who said the bill makes sense just from an economic development point of view, had said, “How stupid can we be” not to see the economic benefits. Renfroe demanded an apology, but Heath didn’t reply.

Last year’s version of the bill died in the House Education Committee. Panel chair Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncho Springs, said earlier this week that he’d support SB 12-015. That could get the measure out of his committee, but House Republican leaders could decide to assign it to a different committee.

Giron and Johnston told reporters Thursday they’re hopeful about the bill’s chances in the House.

Campaign bill meets expected fate

Republicans and Democrats had a lively – but cordial – half-hour debate about what’s wrong with campaign finance laws before the House State Affairs Committee killed House Bill 12-1067 on a party-line vote Thursday, with Republicans in the majority.

The measure would have imposed contribution limits on school board and RTD director races and was prompted by last year’s mega-bucks Denver Public Schools board races. (A similar, and also unsuccessful, 2011 bill was prompted by high-spending DPS races in 2009.)

Sponsoring Reps. Beth McCann and Lois Court, both Denver Democrats, made a spirited defense of the bill, but committee Republicans weren’t convinced.

“This bill does absolutely nothing, zero” to control campaign spending, said Rep. Mark Waller, R-Colorado Springs. “The dollars will go underground” through 527 and other independent expenditure committees, he predicted.

“Money is like water; it’s always going to flow,” said Rep. Larry Liston, R-Colorado Springs.

“Does that just mean we do nothing?” asked McCann. “We want the average parent to be able to run for school board.”

The bill died on a party-line vote, with five Republicans opposing and four Democrats supporting.

Only a light workout for PERA

How much money did the Public Employees’ Retirement Association make in 2011?

Public Employees' Retirement Association headquarters in Denver.

PERA’s assets took a big dive in 2008 but had 17 percent and 14 percent returns in 2009 and 2010.

The pension system, which covers all Colorado teachers and thousands of higher education employees, has lots of critics among Republican lawmakers, but the questioning was fairly easy Thursday.

Critics don’t like the system’s projection of 8 percent annual returns over 30 years, think its board is too weighted toward employees and retirees and argue more civil servants should be in a defined contribution plan instead of the traditional defined benefit plan.

Also on Thursday persistent PERA critic Rep. Jim Kerr, R-Lakewood, introduced House Bill 12-1179, which would change the makeup of PERA’s board. A similar Kerr effort died last year.

See the slides that PERA brass presented to the committees.

Senate Ed gets tied up in knots

After its vote on SB 12-015, the members of Senate Education still had to take up their responsibilities under the SMART Government Act, a new law that requires legislative committees to make recommendations about the budgets of state departments they oversee.

At issue was what committee members thought about the Department of Education’s request for $25.9 million to pay for development of new statewide tests. Members didn’t seem to support that, and after a confused and confusing discussion and set of motions, the committee decided it would rather $1 million be spent to pay school districts to give high school students the Accuplacer test (a pet project of King’s) and that another $2 million be spent to look into development of new social studies and science tests. The leftover money should be plowed back into aid to school districts, members believe.

In addition to its Alice-in-Wonderland quality, the discussion was purely academic. The Joint Budget Committee, which writes the annual state budget proposal, is under no obligation to accept the recommendations of other committees. And the administration of Gov. John Hickenlooper doesn’t want to spend the $25.9 million at all, saying the money isn’t actually available.

Renfroe voted no on all the various motions, citing his objections to the SMART law. (SMART discussions have been consuming lots of time over the last two weeks in every legislative committee.)

Educator effectiveness bill advances

The full House Thursday gave preliminary approval to House Bill 12-1001, the measure to ratify the State Board of Education’s regulations for implementation of Senate Bill 10-191, the principal and teacher evaluation law. There’s no controversy or concern about the bill, which is expected to sail through the legislature and be signed into law by a Feb. 15 deadline.

More money for scholarships?

Gov. John Hickelooper’s office announced Thursday the governor is endorsing a plan to “restructure” Pinnacol Assurance, the giant state-chartered worker compensation insurance company.

The question of selling off Pinnacol is politically tricky and economically complicated, but it’s of interest to education because Hickenlooper has talked about using part of any sale proceeds to beef up the state financial aid fund for college students.

Read the governor’s news release here and the report of the Pinnacol task force here.

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.

Elsewhere around the Capitol, there was an uptick in chatter about the financial future of the Building Excellent Schools Today school construction program, and the House Education Committee put aside a couple of tricky bills but passed three easy ones.

CPR mandate could face pushback

Senate Bill 12-098 would require all schools with high school students to offer student training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the use of an automated external defibrillators.

Students would have to successfully complete the training to graduate from high school. The State Board of Education would be required to issue regulations for the program, including monitoring and compliance. The state also would establish a grant-supported fund to help districts with costs of such training.

The idea is expected to face opposition from several segments of the education lobby, primarily because it would impose a mandate without state funding and because it can been seen as imposing on local control of graduation requirements.

The bill is being pushed by the American Heart Association, which is advocating such legislation in other states. (See this Huffington Post story for background.)

Prime sponsors of the bill are Sen. Suzanne Williams, D-Aurora, and Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs and chair of the House Education Committee. The heart association also is pushing legislation this year to ban use of trans fats in school foods.

Various school health and fitness bills have been defeated or watered down in recent sessions as school districts have successfully made the case that they shouldn’t have new requirements imposed on them without funding.

JBC keeping options open on BEST

The future of funding for the BEST construction program is in play this legislative session, but members of the Joint Budget Committee Wednesday decided to hold their fire on a proposed bill that would have capped the program’s revenues.

BEST is a competitive program under which school districts and charters apply for state funding to renovate or build schools. In most cases local matching money is required, and for larger projects state and local money is pooled to pay off multiyear lease-purchase agreements.

The program receives 50 percent of annual revenues from state school trust lands or the amount necessary to make the annual payments on those lease-purchase agreements.

The JBC Wednesday discussed introducing a bill that would limit annual BEST revenues to $40 million or the amount necessary to make the annual payments, if that’s less. (The effect of such a cap would pretty much eliminate the BEST cash grants program, which is used for smaller projects.)

Legislators have a variety of worries about BEST, including a fear that the program’s obligations may grow larger than revenues from state lands can cover, forcing the legislature to make up the difference from tax revenues. Other lawmakers are concerned that syphoning land revenues for BEST means not enough money is going into the state lands permanent fund.

Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, said committee members may be able to handle their concerns in BEST legislation still to be introduced by Sen. Gail Schwartz, D-Snowmass. “We may end up orchestrating some amendments to that bill.”

JBC Chair Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen, said action needs to be taken on BEST funding. “This problem – it’s sitting on our doorstep. … The clock is ticking.”

(On the other side of Capitol Hill, the Capital Construction Assistance Board, which makes BEST grants, also met Wednesday afternoon. Chair Mary Wickersham mentioned the issue briefly, telling her colleagues, “It’s really premature to get overly anxious.”)

The JBC did vote to introduce another bill that affects state land revenues. In recent years the legislature has been in the habit of “sweeping” land revenues that BEST doesn’t get into the annual school finance bill.

The committee voted unanimously to introduce a bill that would cap the 2011-12 sweep at $36 million, and members may later seek to cap the sweep in 2012-13.

Modest start for House Ed

After delaying action on the two most interesting bills before it, the House Education Committee Wednesday passed two somewhat symbolic bills and one technical measure.

Massey announced at the start that House Bill 12-1072 wouldn’t be considered until next week. The bill would require the Colorado Commission on Higher Education to devise a system for awarding college credits to adult students for life experiences such as work, military service, community involvement and independent study.

The committee did spend a little time on House Bill 12-1043, a concurrent enrollment bill, but Massey also put it on ice for more work and negotiation.

The measure would require school districts, charter schools and BOCES to give certain high school seniors the option of graduating early, continuing to take high school courses or taking up to 15 credit hours per semester at a college of the student’s choice. Eligible seniors would be those who need less than a full load of high school classes to graduate.

School districts have concerns about potential costs of the program because districts would be at least partially responsible for students’ college tuition. Some committee members also raised questions about how the effort would fit with existing concurrent enrollment programs, which allow students to take high school and college classes at the same time.

Here’s a rundown on the bills the committee did approve Wednesday and send to the floor:

House Bill 12-1061 – The proposal would require the Department of Higher Education, working with the Department of Labor, to produce an annual report giving three-year projections of both state workforce needs and expected production of degrees and credentials at state colleges and universities. That report also would have to identify workforce needs that won’t be met by degree production and identify institutions that could meet those needs by creation of new programs or expansion of existing ones.

The sole sponsor is Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Englewood, who has been touting it as a jobs bill and who organized a long parade of business and other witnesses to support the measure.

In response to a committee question, Department of Higher Education lobbyist Chad Marturano said the agency, using a private grant, is preparing a similar project but has no problems with the bill.

House Bill 12-1013 – This measure directs school districts and Charter School Institute schools “to consider” adopting procedures to identify and provide intervention services to middle-school students who show risk factors for dropping out of school.

The bill is a classic example of a program that legislators would like to require but are unable to mandate for financial reasons. So, suggesting that districts do something becomes the fallback position. The bill, developed by a legislative study committee, has bipartisan sponsorship in both houses.

Even one of the prime sponsors, Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, said, “This piece of legislation will just simply make a statement … about how important it is to intervene” with struggling students.

House Bill 12-1081 – This bill brings the Auraria Higher Education Center under the financial and administrative flexibility laws that have been passed in recent years for the rest of the state higher education system.

One more new bill

Also introduced Wednesday was Senate Bill 12-100, which would ban employers from requiring, as a condition of employment, employees to become or remain union or to pay dues to a union, charity or other third party. The bill would apply to school districts and higher education institutions.

The measure has a long list of Republican cosponsors in both houses, has a certain election-year feel to it and has dim prospects in the Democratic controlled Senate. Republicans are perennially critical of teachers’ union dues check-offs that support political campaign funds and go mostly to Democrats.

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.

Two weeks ago the same panel unanimously approved the form and content of the rules (see news item). Under the terms of Senate Bill 12-191, which created the new evaluation system, the legislature has to act on approval of the regulations by Feb. 15. HB 12-1001 would authorize the rules.

Separate legislative review of the effectiveness rules was a compromise inserted into SB 10-191 in an effort to gain support. The long process of drafting the rules involved agreement by all major education interest groups, and Monday’s brief hearing provided a kumbaya moment.

Amy Spicer, representing Stand for Children and a variety of other reform and business groups, said, “The development of these rulings has been a truly collaborative process” and predicted the rules “will set a high standard for educator effectiveness nationwide.”

Diana Sirko, deputy education commissioner, and Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock and a prime sponsor of SB 10-191, made similarly glowing remarks.

Kerrie Dallman, a member of the State Council for Educator Effectiveness and president of the Jefferson County Education Association, stressed that the rules reflected the consensus decision of the council, adding, “The hardest work lies ahead of us.”

Much work does remain to be done on the evaluation system, including pilot testing in selected districts this year and next and addition of regulations on the evaluation of non-classroom educators and the appeals process for teachers who lose non-probationary status because of low evaluations.

Gun bill meets expected fate

The Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee Monday split on party lines to kill Senate Bill 12-025, which proposed to allow people who otherwise are allowed to carry handguns to carry them concealed without obtaining a separate concealed weapons permit.

The so-called “constitutional carry” bill is a perennial proposal by conservative Republicans but has gotten nowhere in the past. Every year there’s confusion about whether the bill would allow carrying of handguns on school grounds and college campuses.

Sponsor Sen. Tim Neville, R-Littleton, explained that the bill wouldn’t allow the carrying of concealed weapons on public school grounds but would allow that to happen at private schools unless schools took action to ban carrying.

Neville said colleges and universities could prohibit carrying of concealed weapons. But he was corrected by legislative lawyer Richard Sweetman, who was asked to clarify the question by Sen. Rollie Heath, D-Boulder and committee chair. Sweetman said the bill would mean anyone who was 21 or older and not a felon could carry a concealed weapon on a college campus.

After taking testimony for witnesses pro and con and having some polite discussion, the committee killed the bill on party lines, with three Democrats opposing and two Republicans supporting.

The state affairs committees in both houses are known as the “kill committees” because that’s where majority leadership assigns bill that are to be defeated before they get to the floor.

A similar measure, House Bill 12-1092, has been introduced in the Republican-controlled House. If it passes there (the GOP has only a one-vote majority), its defeat in the Senate is expected – probably in State Affairs.

Use the Education Bill Tracker for links to bill texts and status information.