Correction: House Bill 1507 would allow students to transfer districts under a number of circumstances. In one instance, a transfer would be allowed if it “will promote greater integration in the nonresident district and will not adversely affect the desegregation of either school district when one (1) of the districts has a minority percentage of any single race of more than 10 percent of its total student population” or “the percentage of enrollment for the student’s race in the nonresident district is less than that percentage in the resident districts.” This article misstated the effect the legislation would have on parents seeking to transfer their children between districts with different racial demographics. This headline also incorrectly stated that House Bill 1507 “would have purged race restrictions.”
The House Education Committee voted down a bill that would rewrite the state’s School Choice Act of 1989, a law that was recently ruled unconstitutional.
Also on the 67th day of the session, legislators voted on a measure to allow guns in church-operated schools and a bill to regulate body art.
House Bill 1507, sponsored by Rep. Kim Hammer, R-Benton, would allow parents to transfer their children to another district if they don’t like the racial demographics in the district where they reside. Under the bill, students also could transfer if they’ve been victims of violent crime on campus, if they’re enrolled in a dangerous school, if they perform poorly on standardized tests or if the school is in academic distress.
Hammer’s legislation would allow students who have switched districts with the help of the School Choice Act to stay where they are even if a judge declares the law unconstitutional. Siblings of students who have used an unconstitutional law to change school districts would be “grandfathered in” so that the federal court ruling would not affect them.
The lawsuit over the School Choice Act is still pending at the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals regarding racial restrictions in the law.
The act allows students to transfer out of their resident school districts with few exceptions. Those exceptions include a prohibition of such transfers if the percentage of enrollment for the student’s race in the new district exceeds that percentage in the district where the student lives.
Parents in Malvern who tried and failed to transfer their children from the 60 percent-white Malvern district to the 95 percent-white Magnet Cove district filed the suit.
In June, U.S. District Judge Robert Dawson found the School Choice Act’s racial restriction violated the parents’ right to equal protection under the law. Dawson stayed the ruling while the higher court considered the appeal.
Hammer said his bill would provide more options for students or parents who want to transfer, but would also include the “race factor” for transfers.
“1507 takes on the challenge that has us in court in the first place. It allows for open choice for reasons other than if you’re claiming academic [distress] or if the school is in facility distress,” Hammer said.
Jess Askew, the attorney for the Malvern parents, told the committee that Hammer’s bill had the “same sin” as the current law because it also includes racial restrictions. Askew, who said he is for school choice, said the race provision could get the entire statute thrown out again in court.
“Why would you put a hand grenade in the basket that contains all the eggs that you want to preserve?” Askew said.
HB1507 is one of several pieces of legislation seeking to provide transfer options to students and parents.
Richard Abernathy, the executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, asked legislators to wait until the 8th Circuit had made a decision in the case before attempting to address the law. He said it would be better to have all of the information in front of lawmakers before passing legislation.
“At some point the Legislature will need to address it after the ruling - very likely,” Abernathy said.
CHARTER SCHOOLS
In a 32-3 vote, the Senate sent to the governor a bill transferring authority for approving charter schools from the state Board of Education to a panel inside the state Department of Education.
The nine-member Board of Education, appointed by the governor, has the authority to approve charter schools under current state law.
House Bill 1528 by Rep. Mark Biviano, R-Searcy, would transfer the authority to a charter panel that would be created in the Department of Education. The state board would be able to ask the panel to reconsider decisions within 30 days.
GUNS IN SCHOOL
In a 29-4 vote, the Senate approved a bill that would let churches decide whether they want to allow concealed weapons at their own church run schools.
Sen. Bryan King, R-Green Forest, said Senate Bill 896 clarifies that if a church allows “concealed carry,” the policy could also apply to the church’s school. A church that does not allow concealed carry would not be affected.
Earlier this session, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 71. Signed into law Feb. 11, it lets churches decide whether to allow for concealed-handgun licensees to carry weapons on church property.
BODY MODIFICATION
The House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee approved two bills to regulate the body-art and -modification industry, including licensing and sanitation.
Senate Bill 388 by Sen. Missy Irvin, R-Mountain View, also would require minors to get parental consent before getting tattooed, pierced, branded or receiving any other type of body art.
Irvin said the bill was brought to her by tattoo artists and piercers who wanted to regulate their own industry.
No body art would be allowed on children under 16 years of age, regardless of parental consent. Ear piercing would still be allowed.
The proposal would make it illegal to apply body art on the nipple or genitalia of a person under 18 years of age except when authorized or prescribed by a doctor’s statement exclusively for recoloration of the skin.
Recoloration or repigmentation is sometimes used to help those who have undergone mastectomies as well as people with birthmarks, scarring or blotchy pigmentation.
The bill also would ban body art on a person who is inebriated or appears to be incapacitated by the use of alcohol or drugs.
The committee also approved Senate Bill 387 by Irvin, which bans any such artist licensed by the state Department of Health from inserting a subdermal implant. It also allows the department to regulate scarification, which is intentional injury of the skin involving scratching, etching or cutting of designs to produce a scar for ornamentation or decoration.
A subdermal implant is an object placed under the skin for ornamentation or decoration.
Robert Brech, chief financial officer for the Health Department said the department presented the bill because it is worried about blurring the line between art and cosmetic surgery.
“The subdermal implants, with the possibility of infection underneath the skin, those should not be done by a body artist,” Brech said.
The Arkansas Body Modification Association initially opposed the bill when it banned scarification, but spoke in favor of the bill after it was amended Thursday.
$1 MILLION CLAIM
The Joint Budget Committee approved a $1 million claim against the state Department of Human Services over objections from the agency director that the award would leave the department with less money to treat young offenders.
If the claim is approved by the full Legislature, the $1 million will go to the family of a man who was shot and killed by a 16-year-old who had been released early from the Department of Human Services’ Youth Services Division.
Maurice “Beau” Clark was killed during a home invasion on June 30, 2009. Antonio Terry, who had been released from the division’s custody two months earlier, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and aggravated robbery in the case and was sentenced to 65 years in prison.
The amount of the claim has varied repeatedly. The state Claims Commission initially awarded $1.5 million to the family, a figure reduced to $500,000 by the Joint Budget Committee’s Claims Subcommittee last week.
The Joint Budget Committee returned the claim to the subcommittee after a member objected, saying that more members should have been present to vote. The claim was then increased to $1 million.
Department of Human Services Director John Selig warned Joint Budget Committee members Thursday that money to pay the claim will come from the division’s community-provider budget. Such providers work in local communities to keep children from being sent to youth lockups.
“I just want people to understand the implications,” Selig said. “It would have a tremendous impact on our community providers.”
BUILDING GRANTS
The Senate unanimously approved a bill that would allow some charter schools to apply for state money to build or maintain an academic facility, purchase land, buy instructional materials or repay debt.
Senate Bill 117 by Sen. David Burnett, D-Osceola, specifies that for the 2013-2014 school year, charter schools would only be eligible to receive grants if they have been in existence for five years or more, provide transportation to and from school, have a record of academic success and have a student population where 60 percent or more of students receive free or reduced-price lunches.
The bill also creates an “Open Enrollment Public Charter School Capital Grant Program Fund” but does not say where the money will come from. Burnett said the funding would come from one-time money.
One charter school company that likely fits all of those qualifications is KIPP Delta Public Schools, which has several campuses.
BONDING AUTHORITY
In a 35-0 vote, the Senate passed a bill that would allow cities and counties to ask voters to approve bond issues for surface-transportation projects paid back with their share of the half-percent sales-tax increase for roads that voters approved in November.
Senate Bill 541 sponsored by Sen. Bruce Maloch, D-Magnolia, would grant authority for the governing body of a city or county to pledge by ordinance all or part of its share of collections from the 10-year, half-percent sales-tax increase for roads to retire bonds for these projects. The ordinance wouldn’t be effective unless the bond issue is approved by a majority of voters in the city or county.
Cities and counties each receive 15 percent of the collections from the sales-tax increase for roads.
The bonds would have to have a final maturity date not later than July 1, 2023.
MANDATORY PAROLE
In other business, the House voted 88-0 in favor of a measure that would give the state Parole Board the ability to deny parole for certain serious felonies.
Rep. Marshall Wright, D-Forrest City, said Senate Bill 259, proposed by Sen. David Sanders, R-Little Rock, would give the Parole Board discretion to keep people in prison who may still be dangerous.
Wright said that under the current law, the Parole Board is required to release some violent offenders after they have served a certain amount of the sentence.
Front Section, Pages 1 on 03/22/2013