Under current law, a school district may admit a pupil who resides in another
school district if the pupil's parents pay tuition. In addition, a pupil may attend a
public school located outside his or her school district of residence if the 2 school
boards agree, the state superintendent approves and the school district of residence
pays tuition.
This bill creates an interdistrict school choice program. Beginning in the
1996-97 school year, the bill provides that a pupil may attend any public school
located outside his or her school district of residence if the pupil's parent complies
with certain application dates and procedures, and requires the school district of
residence to pay tuition or an amount agreed to between the 2 school districts. The
school district of residence continues to count the pupil in enrollment for state aid
purposes.
The school board of attendance may reject an application only if there is no
space available in the school or program or the pupil is involved in a disciplinary
proceeding. The school board must reject an application, however, if acceptance
would violate a plan to reduce racial imbalance in the school district or would be
harmful to the efforts of the school board to achieve racial balance in the school
district. Similarly, a school district may prohibit a resident pupil from attending
school in another school district if the pupil is involved in a disciplinary proceeding.
A school district must prohibit a resident pupil from attending school in another
school district if allowing such attendance would violate a plan to reduce racial
imbalance in the school district or would be harmful to the efforts of the school board
to achieve racial balance in the school district.
Beginning in the 1996-97 school year, this bill also creates an interdistrict
enrollment options program under which a pupil enrolled in a public school may
attend a public school in another school district in order to take one or more courses
under certain circumstances. The pupil must continue to attend school in his or her
school district of residence for at least one course; the school board of the other school
district must determine that there is space available; the school board of the resident
school district must not offer, or have space available in, a comparable course; if the
course is offered in the high school grades, the school board of the resident school
district must determine that the course satisfies high school graduation
requirements; and the pupil must meet all of the prerequisites for the course.
Acceptance and rejection criteria and procedures for the program are identical to the
acceptance and rejection criteria and procedures for the interdistrict school choice
program.
The school board of the school district of residence must pay to the school board
of the other school district an amount equal to the cost of providing a course to a
nonresident pupil under the program, as determined by DOE.
Beginning in the 1996-97 school year, this bill allows a pupil enrolled in a public
school to attend a public school located within the pupil's school district of residence
but outside the pupil's attendance area under certain circumstances. The school
board must determine that there is space available and the pupil must meet all of
the prerequisites for the course.
The bill provides that the school board may not reject an application to attend
a school in a different attendance area based on the pupil's academic achievement.
In addition, the provision described above regarding acceptance or rejection based
on the effect on the school district's plans to reduce racial imbalance applies to the
intradistrict enrollment options program.
The bill allows a school board that is participating in a special transfer program
to reduce racial imbalance (commonly known as chapter 220) or in a merged
attendance area program to reduce racial imbalance to modify the application
deadlines established in this bill if the deadlines would conflict with chapter 220 or
merged attendance area program procedures.
In addition, the parent of a pupil who resides in a school district participating
in one of the integration programs must submit the application to attend another
school district to the school board of the school district of residence for approval.
The bill also authorizes DOE to modify any provision contained in the
interdistrict and intradistrict programs if DOE agrees with the school board that the
provision is harmful to the integration program or to the school district's efforts to
achieve racial balance.
Current law allows up to 1.5% of the enrollment of the Milwaukee Public
Schools (MPS) to attend, at no charge, any nonsectarian private school located in the
city of Milwaukee under certain circumstances. The state pays the private school,
on behalf of the pupil, an amount equal to the amount of per pupil aid that MPS
receives from the state, and subtracts that amount from the amount paid to MPS.
This bill makes a number of changes in the program beginning in the 1996-97
school year:
1. The bill allows pupils who reside in the city to attend any private school,
whether sectarian or nonsectarian.
2. The bill eliminates the 1.5% enrollment limitation described above but
provides that no more than 3,500 pupils in the 1996-97 school year and no more than
5,500 pupils in the 1997-98 school year may participate in the program.
3. The bill eliminates a provision that limits the percentage of a private school's
enrollment that may participate in the program to 65%.
4. The bill provides that in the 1995-96 school year, the amount paid per pupil
is the same as in the 1994-95 school year. Beginning in the 1996-97 school year, the
private school receives that amount, increased by the increase in the consumer price
index (CPI), or the private school's operating cost per pupil, whichever is less.
5. The bill provides that the MPS aid reduction described above must come first
from aid paid to MPS for its special transfer program, commonly known as chapter
220.
6. Finally, the bill directs DOE, when making the payment, to send a check to
the private school that is made out to the pupil's parent or guardian. The parent or
guardian must restrictively endorse the check for the use of the private school.
Current law authorizes a school board on its own initiative, or upon receipt of
a petition signed by at least 10% of the teachers employed by the school district or
by at least 50% of the teachers employed at one school, to contract for the operation
of up to 2 schools as charter schools. A charter school is exempt from most laws
governing public schools. A school board may not establish a charter school without
the approval of the state superintendent, who must approve the first 10 requests for
approval and must ensure that charter schools are established in no more than 10
school districts. If the school board acts on its own initiative or if a petition is granted,
the school board may contract for the operation of a school as a charter school. The
contract must specify the amount that the school district will pay the charter school
each year. Charter school employes remain school district employes and may
participate in the Wisconsin retirement system.
This bill makes a number of changes in the provisions governing charter
schools, including:
1. The bill deletes the requirement for state superintendent approval to
establish a charter school, deletes the limit on the number of charter schools that a
school board may establish and deletes the 10-school-district limit.
2. The bill deletes a provision that prohibits a school board from spending more
per pupil enrolled in a charter school than it spends per pupil enrolled in a public
school.
3. The bill provides that a requirement for all charter schools to be nonsectarian
in their programs, admission policies, employment practices and other operations
does not apply to charter schools established by MPS.
4. The bill deletes the requirement that all charter school personnel be school
district employes.
5. The bill authorizes a school board to enter into a contract for the operation
of a charter school that results in the conversion of a private school to a charter
school. Current law prohibits a school district from entering into such a contract.
This bill authorizes MPS to contract with nonprofit, private schools or agencies
located in the city of Milwaukee to provide educational programs to pupils enrolled
in grades kindergarten to 12. The bill allows pupils enrolled in MPS to attend, at no
charge, any private school or agency with which the board has contracted. The board
must establish educational standards for pupil performance for each contracting
private school and agency.
This bill authorizes the MPS board to contract with any person to manage or
operate one or more schools. The bill also authorizes the MPS board to close a school
that it determines is low in performance by adopting a resolution to that effect. The
bill provides that if the board closes a school, or reopens the school, the
superintendent of schools may reassign staff members without regard to seniority
in service.
This bill directs the secretary of education to reorganize the 12 cooperative
educational service agencies (CESAs) into 15 CESAs, effective on July 1, 1997. Each
reorganized CESA is coterminous with a technical college district, except that
reorganized CESA no. 5 is coterminous with the territory of 2 technical college
districts and except that the school board of a school district that is located in more
than one technical college district must select the reorganized CESA in which the
school district will participate.
The bill adds 2 members to each technical college district board: one member
of the board of control of the CESA that is located in the district and one employe of
a school district or CESA who represents a school-to-work program. Both are
appointed by the board of control.
The bill also adds members to each CESA board of control: one member of the
technical college district board of the technical college district located in the CESA
and a representative of each University of Wisconsin System institution and center
that is located in the agency.
The bill authorizes a CESA to contract with all public and private entities and
to apply for state and federal grants for the CESA and on behalf of school districts.
This bill authorizes a school district, as an alternative to the employment of
teachers, to contract with any person for the performance of teaching or other
educational services by individuals who are licensed by the state superintendent but
who are not employes of the school district.
If a school district decides to subcontract work that would otherwise be
performed by employes in a collective bargaining unit for which a representative is
recognized or certified, and the decision is primarily related to the wages, hours or
conditions of employment of employes in the bargaining unit, the school district must
first bargain collectively with the representative concerning that decision. See
Unified School District No. 1 of Racine County v. Wisconsin Employment Relations
Commission, 81 Wis. 2d 89 (1977).
This bill provides that the statutory duties and powers of school boards are to
be broadly construed to authorize any action that is within the comprehensive
meaning of the terms of the duties and powers, if the action is not prohibited by
federal or state law.
With certain exceptions, this bill authorizes DPI, upon request of a school
board, to waive any school board or school district requirement in the laws
administered by DPI or in the administrative rules promulgated by DPI. Before
requesting a waiver, the school board must hold a public hearing in the school district
on the issue. In determining whether to grant a waiver, DPI must consider whether
the requirement impedes progress toward achieving a local improvement plan under
the federal Goals 2000: Educate America Act, and whether the school board has
adopted educational goals. A waiver is effective for 4 years and may be renewed for
additional 4-year periods.
Under current law, teachers employed at a public school located in Milwaukee
County are permanent employes upon the gaining of a 4th contract in the school or
school system after a continuous and successful 3-year probation. This bill repeals
the permanent employment status provision.
Under current law, each school board must employ a reading specialist, licensed
by the state superintendent, to develop and coordinate a comprehensive reading
curriculum in grades kindergarten to 12. This bill eliminates the requirement to
employ a reading specialist.
Current law requires each school board to administer pupil assessment
examinations adopted or approved by the state superintendent to all pupils enrolled
in the 8th and 10th grades. A school board may administer additional examinations
only if they are aligned with the school district's curriculum. This bill eliminates this
latter requirement.
Current law requires MPS to use 67% of certain funds allocated to MPS to
provide a mentor teacher program and a peer coaching program, and the balance for
school administrator assessment and development. This bill directs MPS to use all
of these funds for professional staff development.
This bill authorizes a school board to establish a performance recognition plan
that annually allocates at least 2% of the school district's payroll, excluding the cost
of fringe benefits, for performance recognition awards to school district employes.
If a school board adopts a performance recognition plan, it must establish a
committee to develop employe performance standards and a committee to develop a
process to review employe performance and make recommendations to each
principal regarding award recipients and the amount of each award. The committees
are composed of school district employes, school administrators and parents or
guardians of pupils enrolled in the school district. The principal of each school
determines award recipients and award amounts, subject to the total amount
allocated to that school.
Currently, with certain exceptions, governmental bodies are required to
provide public notice of their meetings and meet in open session. This bill excludes
committees that make recommendations concerning school district performance
recognition awards from the application of this law.
Under current law, the general school aid appropriation is a sum certain
amount. Beginning in the 1995-96 school year, however, the appropriation is
changed to a sum sufficient. The amount appropriated is the amount necessary to
ensure that the total amount appropriated as general school aid and minimum aid
is sufficient to allow school districts the maximum revenue increase possible under
the school district revenue limit, as determined by the joint committee on finance
(JCF). This bill maintains the general school aid appropriation as a sum certain
amount.
Under the current school aid formula, the guaranteed valuation is the amount
of property tax base support that the state guarantees to each pupil. The current
formula has 2 levels of state support, a primary guaranteed valuation and a
secondary guaranteed valuation. The secondary guaranteed tax base applies to costs
above a certain level. Because the secondary guarantee is lower than the main,
primary guarantee, it generates less state aid on the costs to which it applies. The
dividing point between use of the primary and secondary guarantees is called the
primary ceiling cost per member. Currently, the primary ceiling cost per member is
set annually at the previous school year's ceiling increased by the percentage change
in the CPI.
This bill adds a tertiary level of state support beginning in the 1996-97 school
year. Under the bill, the primary ceiling cost per member is $1,000. In the 1996-97
school year, the secondary ceiling cost per member is the 1995-96 primary ceiling
cost per member increased by the percentage change in the CPI. Thereafter, the
secondary ceiling cost per member is the secondary ceiling cost per member in the
previous school year increased by the percentage change in the CPI.
Under current law, a school district may receive minimum state aid in an
amount that is based on the district's median household income and the amount of
aid that it receives under the school equalization aid formula. The current amount
that a school district may receive under the minimum state aid program is a
minimum of $175 per pupil and a maximum of $400 per pupil. This bill eliminates
the minimum aid program beginning in the 1996-97 school year.
Current law limits the increase in the total amount of revenue that a school
district may receive from general school aids and property taxes in the 1993-94 to
1997-98 school years. In the 1993-94 school year, the maximum allowable increase
per pupil was $190 or the per pupil revenue amount multiplied by the rate of
inflation, whichever was greater. Beginning in the 1994-95 school year, the $190 per
pupil amount is adjusted each year by the rate of inflation. The limit is based on the
difference between the average of the number of pupils enrolled in the 3 previous
school years and the average of the number of pupils enrolled in the current and 2
preceding school years. If a school district exceeds its revenue limits, the state
superintendent is required to deduct from the district's general state aid (or other
state aids, if necessary) an amount equal to the excess revenue. If these state aids
are not sufficient to cover the amount of the excess revenue, the state superintendent
must order the school board to reduce the property tax obligations of its taxpayers
by an amount that equals the remaining excess revenue after the deduction of state
aids. If these property tax obligations are not reduced, any resident in the school
district may seek injunctive relief in court. The state superintendent must also make
sure that any such reductions in state aid lapse to the general fund and that the
amount of the excess revenue is not used in calculating the school district's revenue
limit in the following year.
This bill modifies the formula used to compute a school district's revenue limit
by expanding the types of school aid under the limit. The bill includes in state aid
all current categorical aids to schools that are formula-driven, such as handicapped
education aid and pupil transportation aid. The bill does not include those
categorical aids that are grant programs.
The bill also makes the revenue limits permanent and freezes the allowable
annual increase in revenue per pupil at $194 beginning in the 1995-96 school year.
The bill exempts from the revenue limits those school districts whose base
revenue per pupil is less than $5,200 in the 1995-96 school year and $5,500 in each
subsequent school year. Base revenue per pupil is determined by calculating the sum
of general school aid received in the previous year and property taxes levied for the
previous year, less funds expended on school district debt service, and the costs of a
county handicapped children's education board program, dividing this amount by
the sum of the average of the number of pupils in the 3 previous school years and the
number of pupils who are school district residents who are solely enrolled in a special
education board program provided by a county handicapped children's education
board program in the previous school year, and adding $194 to the quotient.
Finally, if a school district exceeds its revenue limit, the bill provides that the
reductions in state aid that lapse to the general fund are to be paid to the school
district in the succeeding school year. The school board is required to reduce the
school district's property tax levy by an amount that equals the amount that lapsed
to the general fund in the prior school year.
Currently, with certain exceptions, no school district may grant to its
nonrepresented professional employes for any 12-month period ending on June 30
an average increase in compensation, for all such employes, prior to July 1, 1996,
having an average cost per employe of more than 2.1% of the total cost per employe
of compensation and fringe benefits provided by the district to its nonrepresented
professional employes.
This bill provides, instead, that no school district may grant to its
nonrepresented professional employes for any 12-month period ending on June 30
an average increase in compensation, for all such employes, prior to July 1, 1996,
having an average cost per employe exceeding the highest average total percentage
increased cost per employe of compensation provided by the school district to its
represented employes in any collective bargaining unit during either of the 2 most
recent 12-month periods ending on June 30 preceding the date that the increase for
nonrepresented professional employes becomes effective.
This bill eliminates the reimbursement rates for handicapped education costs
and school age parents program costs of 63% for program staff and transportation
costs and 51% for the costs of psychologists and social workers. The bill directs that
aidable costs be fully reimbursed, subject to the availability of funds.
Under current law, the state provides state aid to school districts to support
voluntary efforts by school districts to reduce racial imbalance. Aid is provided for
both interdistrict transfer and intradistrict transfer programs. Aid for an
intradistrict transfer program is calculated by multiplying the general state aid per
pupil in the school district by the number of pupils participating in the program,
weighted such that each transfer pupil is counted as an additional 0.325 of a pupil.
Interdistrict transfer aid is calculated in such a manner that each transfer pupil
continues to be counted as 1.0 pupil in aid by the school district of residence; the
gaining school district is paid the per pupil cost of that school district for each
transfer pupil or, if such pupils constitute at least 5% of the total enrollment of the
gaining school district, 20% more.
Beginning in the 1996-97 school year, this bill provides that the gaining school
district is paid, for each interdistrict transfer pupil, the per pupil cost in the gaining
school district or $7,000, whichever is less.
The bill also provides that if a school district receives intradistrict transfer aid
in the 1995-96 school year, in each subsequent school year its aid may not exceed the
amount determined by multiplying the amount per transfer pupil received in the
previous school year by the CPI. If a school district does not receive intradistrict aid
in the 1995-96 school year, its aid in the first school year in which it receives such
aid is calculated as under current law. In each subsequent school year, its aid may
not exceed the amount determined by multiplying the amount per transfer pupil
received in the previous school year by the CPI.
Current law appropriates money to DPI for the purposes of correcting the
academic deficiencies of educationally and economically disadvantaged pupils and
achieving a more effective and responsive educational program in MPS. In the
1993-94 school year, the funds were distributed according to a plan developed by the
governor and the state superintendent and approved by JCF.
For the 1995-96 school year, this bill directs the MPS school board to submit
a proposal for the expenditure of the funds to the governor for his or her approval.
In subsequent school years, the governor must submit a proposal to JCF for its
approval.
Under current law, DPI awards grants to school districts for various programs,
including all of the following:
1. Learning assistance programs.
2. Programs that enhance the instruction of mathematics and science in the
elementary grades.
3. Staff development programs.
4. Programs designed to promote the interaction of pupils and teachers with
professional scientists, engineers and mathematicians.
5. Human growth and development programs.
This bill eliminates all of the above grant programs.
