After rejecting a handful of proposed amendments, the Florida House is now ready to take a final vote on its charter school legislation. But one of the most interesting proposals on the floor today was one that was not adopted.
Rep. Michael Bileca, R-Miami, proposed an amendment that would have given school districts more flexibility under state building regulations. He pulled the proposal, citing concerns that it wasn’t germane to the charter school bill.
But it’s part of a larger thrust among lawmakers trying to navigate tensions between charter schools and school districts. Charter schools do not have to comply with all the state’s regulations for school facilities, but they still have to comply with building codes. Districts have asked for some of the flexibility enjoyed by charter schools, and state panels have discussed the issue when they grappled with plans to address long-range capital funding needs.
“It’s strongly supported and was done at the urging of our school districts, many of them in the state,” Bileca said of his proposal, which would have given school district more flexibility in the ways they design their parking lots and build interior walls.
It’s not clear what will become of that idea, but there are other ideas still in play that fit with a similar theme. Charter schools also enjoy more flexibility under class-size requirements in the state constitution. Their financial penalties for failing to comply with the class-size rules are based on the school-wide average.
The budget conference announced today includes an education funding bill (HB 5101) that would extend the same flexibility to school districts. That proposal, however, remains controversial. It was one of the reasons cited by Democrats for votes against the bill earlier this month. Rep. Joe Saunders, D-Orlando, cited the measure as part of a “slow attrition” of the constitutional provision.
“I feel very strongly that when the voters passed the class-size amendment in 2002, we got clear directive. We got clear directive that our class sizes should stay small,” he said.
The idea has been proposed before. It advanced last session but did not pass. Supporters note the penalty calculations are not enshrined in the constitution, and that changes could save the school system money. Regardless of how the idea fares in the next two weeks, it’s part of a larger theme to keep an eye on as lawmakers resolve their differences over charter school legislation and facilities funding.
