MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Sixty-eighth Session March 15, 1995 The Committee on Education was called to order at 3:30 p.m., on Wednesday, March 15, 1995, Chairman Wendell P. Williams presiding in Room 330 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. William Z. (Bill) Harrington, Chairman Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Chairman Mrs. Gene Wines Segerblom, Vice Chairman Mrs. Patricia A. Tripple, Vice Chairman Mr. Thomas Batten Mr. Max Bennett Mrs. Deanna Braunlin Mrs. Vonne Chowning Mrs. Marcia de Braga Mr. Mark Manendo Mr. P.M. Roy Neighbors Mrs. Jeannine Stroth COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: None GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Young, Nevada State Education Association Jean S. Newman, Nevada State Education Association Gloria Williams, Nevada State Education Association Harold Ridgway, Elko County School District Mary Goodman, Lyon County School District Kay Buchanan, Nevada State Education Association Mary Warren, Nevada State Education Association Roger Warren, Nevada State Education Association Terry Hickman, Nevada State Education Association Janet Andrews, Nevada State Education Association Verlene Chiodini, Nevada State Education Association Peggy Rosch, Nevada State Education Association Sandy Curts, Nevada State Education Association AdaMarie Hooper, Nevada State Education Association Dr. Patti Hawkins, Nevada School Districts Greg Betts, Rural School Districts Patty Dickens, Nevada State Education Association Gaylea Manning, Nevada State Education Association, Ormsby County Education Association Richard G. Scott, Nevada State Education Association, Ormsby County Education Association, Eagle Valley Middle School, Carson City Charles D. Keller, Nevada State Education Association, Ormsby County Education Association David Linn, Nevada State Education Association Judi Linn, Nevada State Education Association Martha Trujillo, Nevada State Education Association Ed Urioste, Nevada State Education Association Ramon Dominguez, Nevada State Education Association Chairman Williams turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Segerblom because the bill discussed in the meeting was sponsored by him. The hearing on Assembly Bill 283 was opened. ASSEMBLY BILL 283 - Requires school districts to submit annual report to superintendent of public instruction concerning recruitment of new teachers. Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, Assembly District 6 explained A.B. 283 deals with the recruitment of teachers. Teachers are the most important component of any classroom and it is imperative recruiting be done in a deliberate, cost effective and accountable manner to get the most productive and effective teachers available for Nevada students. The bill requires a plan be submitted by each school district to the State Department of Education outlining their plans for effective recruiting. The report would include recruitment materials, and other items described in Subsection 3 of the bill involving the recruitment of new teachers who will reflect the diversity of the pupils residing in the district. In 1991 it was ascertained by the year 2000 the majority of the students in Nevada will be minority students. Mr. Williams felt it would be to the best advantage of Nevada to focus recruitment efforts on minority teachers. The planning of recruitment trips by school districts needs to be done in the most cost effective ways to get best qualified candidates for the dollars spent. When the reports are submitted to the Department of Education, the districts will not be punished for not achieving goals stated in the reports. The desire is to have appropriate planning for recruitment purposes. Mr. Williams explained he had spoken to Ms. Mary Peterson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction who indicated her support for the intentions of A.B. 283. Assemblyman Batten asked if the bill was directed at Clark County. Mr. Williams replied the bill was to be applied statewide. Mr. Batten asked why school districts have a problem recruiting minorities and if school districts have expressed that difficulty. Mr. Williams answered some districts have expressed difficulty with minority recruitment. He explained legislation was appropriated in 1991 for $300,000 to districts in the state for minority recruitment. The efforts from the $300,000 did not warrant the Ways and Means Committee to extend the funding in the 1993 session. Ms. Peterson of the State Education Department expressed to Mr. Williams it was her hope having A.B. 283 in place would encourage future money for minority recruitment. Mr. Williams noted in some districts planning is not done in a way to maximize opportunities to recruit. Mr. Batten explained he could not support the bill in the current form because it has no punitive section. The districts do not have to abide by it. He felt a resolution would be more appropriate. Mr. Williams stated he agreed, but not exactly. He stated situations have existed where abuse of funds has existed on recruitment trips. The purpose is to keep recruiting cost effective. If recruitment plans are filed with the state, more accountability will take place. Chairman Segerblom asked if a set per diem was given for recruitment. Mr. Williams did not know. He stated he is not implying abuse of recruitment dollars is a common practice in any school district. The recruitment of good teachers is so important to public education, it is imperative for districts to develop plans to attract competent teachers. Regardless of expenditures on technology, a competent teacher makes the difference in the classroom. The competitive nature of recruitment was discussed. Assemblyman Bennett asked if major colleges and universities with well respected education programs were targeted for teacher recruitment. Mr. Williams stated he worked for flexibility in the bill. In Nevada the seventeen counties and their situations are so different, plans need to be flexible to meet their needs. Mr. Bennett stated he was understanding the bill as addressing recruitment plans by each school district and not as a statewide plan. Mr. Williams agreed Mr. Bennett was understanding the bill correctly. In recruitment planning, recruitment fairs may be attended as opposed to recruiters just choosing a day to visit any given university. Assemblyman Chowning wondered what information was being received now from school districts regarding recruiting. Mr. Williams stated he had not spoken to all counties. Several counties plan recruiting strategies but do not have a written plan. He reiterated how competitive recruiting is. Ms. Chowning stated she hoped alleged recruitment expense abuses were tempered by recruiters paying the difference between allowed per diem and actual expenses incurred, if it were the desire of the recruiter to do so. She felt the measure was excellent because it requires a plan and someone to oversee it, giving more accountability. She indicated a report to the next legislative session might be appropriate. Ms. Chowning stated her opinion that the best teacher does not always reflect the diversity of the pupils residing in the district. She agreed minority recruitment was important, but expressed concern about less capable minority teachers being recruited in place of non-minority, more qualified candidates. Mr. Williams agreed with Ms. Chowning's views. He stated it would be in the best interests of the students to some degree to attempt to recruit minority teachers for cultural purposes. Ms. Chowning concurred with Mr. Williams. She expressed concern about not taking anything away from teachers currently employed. Mr. Williams reiterated his opinion the best teachers, regardless of their ethnicity, are the ones to be recruited. The students deserve the best possible teachers. To attract those teachers, a recruitment plan is necessary. Assemblyman Harrington inquired about the fiscal note on the bill. Mr. Williams stated he had no information on the fiscal note for school districts. Ms. Peterson of the State Education Department told Mr. Williams the fiscal amount would not be substantial. Mr. Harrington asked if Mr. Williams expected the amount to be minimal. Mr. Williams replied affirmatively. Mr. Harrington referred to Line 13 of the bill and inquired if "diversity" referred to racial and cultural as opposed to gender, religion or sexual orientation. Mr. Williams defined diversity as racial and cultural. Ms. Debbie Cahill, Nevada State Education Association, spoke in favor of A.B. 283. The association believes recruitment is a critical issue. Due to the growth impact in Nevada, it has been difficult to fill teaching positions. Minority recruitment is important and crucial. The report to be generated would provide information on where the state currently stands. The state lost track of that information when the funds from the 1991 Legislative allocation ran out. Mr. Harrington asked what results have occurred with minority recruitment. He also asked what the percentages of minority teachers were to the number of minority students. Ms. Cahill stated she had not seen recent figures. At one point the percentages were extremely low. An enormous disparity existed between minority teachers to the percentage of minority students. The last figures available were from the $300,000 allocation from the 1991 session. She noted some improvement may have occurred, but without the report there is no way of knowing. Mr. Harrington asked if anyone knew where we stood at one point. Mr. Williams stated he did not know in actual numbers. The issue of minority teachers will not be an issue in some counties. Ms. Cahill explained some rural counties banded together to share their portion of the $300,000 to do a rural recruitment. A brochure was published by the rural counties. The impact in the rural counties was not just finding appropriate minority teachers, but to find candidates who wanted to live in rural areas. Urban recruitment makes this difficult. Mr. Williams reported the rural counties used the monies well. He stated he would find it interesting if the rural counties oppose A.B. 283, why they accepted the money at the time. Ms. Cahill agreed the counties used the monies well. Mr. Batten reiterated his question as to what mechanism should be in place if the requirements of A.B. 283 are not met. Ms. Cahill stated she felt she could not speak for school districts. The creation of the report would give information to be looked at if problems and inconsistencies exist. If districts chose not to report because no punitive measures exist, it would be a signal to local school boards and the state to request the local administration to provide the information. Mr. Williams stated the bill was not created from a punitive standpoint. If the reports are available to the Education Committee in the 1997 session, the reports would be studied and suggestions made to districts to enhance recruitment. Punitive measures do not need to be addressed at this time. The issue of competent teacher recruitment is what is important. He hoped there would not be negative reactions from school districts, but be seen as a way of everyone joining together to be visionary for the sake of the children. Mr. Williams did not wish A.B. 283 to be a threat but a reminder everyone should be accountable, cost effective, and hire the best teachers, whoever they are, for Nevada children. Mrs. Segerblom asked if more money will be requested for recruiting. Mr. Williams stated the $300,000 from the 1991 session was above and beyond what was normally given districts. It was extra money specifically for minority recruitment. Some of the money was used by Clark and Washoe Counties for individuals who work in education who are not licensed teachers to take classes to become teachers. These counties and the State Superintendent have advised Mr. Williams using the money in this manner was extremely positive. The money was not reappropriated in 1993 because the legislature was not comfortable with how the money was handled and spent. Ms. Peterson hoped this legislation would lead to the enactment of more appropriations for similar programs. Mr. Williams reiterated his belief Nevada has the opportunity to take the "high road" and take the lead in teacher recruitment by developing strong recruiting plans. Mr. Batten asked if the committee could request whatever reports are available currently. Assemblyman Manendo asked if the report will be made to the public as well as to school districts. Mr. Williams stated it was his understanding it will be public information. Mr. Bennett stated he did not regard the bill as something to deal with recruitment abuse. Regarding lodging, he inquired if reference would be made to the government reimbursible rate. He noted each city has reimbursible rates for lodging, meals and incidental expenses. Mr. Williams agreed with Mr. Bennett. He stated it was his understanding most recruiters had per diems. The intent is to develop plans to obtain current rates and be within the guidelines to maximize efforts with available funds. Dr. Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent, State Education Department offered to give answers to questions posed in earlier testimony. Referring to current culturally diverse recruitment, he explained the information is collected yearly. The 1995 reports are out. Dr. Rheault offered to provide the committee with information on culturally diverse teachers in the state from 1991 to present. While serving as a consultant in 1991 he was given the fiscal responsibility to oversee the $300,000 for the minority teacher education project. Dr. Rheault offered the committee a final report on expenditures for the project. He stated a number of innovative, responsible plans used by the districts. The programs used by Clark and Washoe county school districts were in-district minority recruiting and were very successful. The number of teachers exposed to recruiters varies with where the recruiters go. Dr. Rheault spoke to specific expenses for materials developed through the rural alliance. He hoped the committee would consider financial assistance in this program. Mrs. Segerblom thanked Dr. Rheault for his offer and accepted it. Ms. Elaine Lancaster, NSEA, addressed what Washoe County has done in minority recruitment. Washoe County was able to continue the minority recruiter originally funded from the $300,000 allotment of the 1991 legislature in a half time position. In 1993 12 minority teachers were brought into Washoe County and in 1994 11 minority teachers were brought in. The job is performed from January 28 until the end of the year. The salary was funded out of general funds and travel expenses were taken from elsewhere in the budget. Ms. Lancaster favored the report. Mr. Harrington asked what percentage of minority students and teachers are in Washoe County. Ms. Lancaster stated she did not have those figures. She stated it was not as good as it should be. Mrs. Segerblom called for those who wished to testify in opposition to the bill. Mr. Harold Ridgway, Deputy Superintendent, Elko County School District, explained he is responsible for personnel and the overseeing of recruiting for his district. He and Dr. Patti Hawkins, Personnel Director for the Carson City School District, were speaking on behalf of their own districts and the personnel directors group. The personnel director's group consists of different personnel director's largely in the rural areas. Mr. Ridgway questioned the purpose of the bill. Submission of a plan as required in A.B. 283 before execution requiring cost containment information and other things smacks at an attempt at micro management. Existing recruiting efforts in Mr. Ridgway's district and other rural districts are the responsibility of the various boards of trustees of those districts, and the personnel directors are accountable to those boards. Mr. Ridgway stated it was quite interesting a bill such as this was submitted when no one had asked rural districts what they do relating to recruitment. It says to the rural districts they are not doing the job when something is put into play to formulate plans, and justify plans. He does not believe the legislation is appropriate and the subject should not be a legislative issue. It is a local district issue. Local districts take recruiting teachers very seriously. He urged the committee to not pass the legislation. Dr. Patty Hawkins, Associate Superintendent, Carson City School District, introduced Mary Goodman, Associate Superintendent for Personnel, Lyon County, and Mindy Ratsliff, Director of Personnel, Douglas County School District. Dr. Hawkins told the committee her office is constantly bombarded with requests for reports. It requires additional staff, time and dollars to complete these reports. The information requested in A.B. 283 is already provided to the State Department of Education. Dr. Hawkins informed the committee she works with her superintendent, who is directed by the school board, as to what areas recruiting should take place. The process relates to site-based management. Working closely with all site principals, who work with their teachers and the parents, recruiting decisions are a team effort. Dr. Hawkins recruits to attempt to fulfill the needs of the schools in the districts. She finds it too bad recruiting abuse has reflected upon other districts in which this is not the case. When the minority recruitment grant was received, rural school districts banded together and created an excellent plan, which was taken very seriously. No more extra dollars exist and current recruiting is done with general fund monies controlled by local boards of trustees. Those boards know their communities best. In a recent retreat held by the Carson City School Board, one of the discussed goals was improving and expanding minority recruiting efforts. This was done with no directives from anyone. A disparity exists, especially in rural districts. Those districts have difficulty in recruiting minority candidates because many minorities are in urban areas and do not wish to move. Dr. Hawkins asked the committee to hear the districts are being responsible and to realize all recruiting expenditures are audited. Dr. Hawkins stated another report to the state board was not necessary. She urged the committee to vote against A.B. 283. Mr. Williams stated the legislature sets policy for the school boards in many areas. He was confused as to why Mr. Ridgway felt it was a problem to submit a recruiting plan if a plan indeed existed. Mr. Ridgway stated he realized the legislature had the right to enact legislation. He reiterated he felt this was an inappropriate legislative issue and was a local school board issue. Mr. Williams disagreed, saying he felt the legislation was legitimate and wanted to know why it was disagreeable to do something already being done. Dr. Hawkins stated documentation and information was provided. The difficulty is having local staff and state board staff compile and reproduce the information more than once. Mr. Williams said Dr. Hawkins had indicated a report was already in place. Dr. Hawkins explained the report Dr. Rheault discussed regarding the ethnicity of teachers and staff in all districts was what she was referring to. The other report Dr. Rheault referred to was a result of the minority recruiting dollars funded in the 1991 legislative session. Mr. Williams asked how recruiting was planned in Dr. Hawkins' district. Dr. Hawkins explained again she works with school principals, teachers and parents on staffing needs. The Superintendent and Board of Trustees discuss recruiting efforts and suggestions, aided by ideas from Dr. Hawkins. Personnel directors meet monthly to exchange recruiting ideas. Dr. Hawkins disclosed opportunities for recruitment often occur unexpectedly and flexibility to take advantage of those opportunities need to exist. Mr. Williams stated he felt if the plan is not on paper it is not a plan. He felt adding to the plan when opportunities arise was fine. Dr. Hawkins reiterated her concern for the districts having to prepare more reports. Mr. Williams asked if the opposition was to the number of reports required by the State Department of Education or to this particular report. Dr. Hawkins asserted she did not find this particular report necessary because she reports to the Board of Trustees through the Superintendent on these items. Mr. Williams asked if the Board of Trustees of Dr. Hawkins district took a stand in opposition to A.B. 283. Dr. Hawkins stated she represented her Superintendent. Mr. Williams asked if the Superintendent had instructed the opposition. Dr. Hawkins stated she could not speak for him. Mr. Williams asked if the Superintendent had taken a position on the bill. Dr. Hawkins stated the Superintendent told her the local school board already has responsibility for her actions in recruiting. Mr. Williams asked if the Superintendent had told Dr. Hawkins to oppose the bill. Dr. Hawkins stated the Superintendent asked her to attend the meeting. Mr. Williams asked if the school Board of Trustees had looked at the bill. Dr. Hawkins stated she could not respond to that. Mr. Ridgway stated he was in attendance on behalf of his Superintendent who directed Mr. Ridgway to oppose the bill. Mr. Bennett asked if each school district filled out the federal EEOC yearly report. The report contains minority status by job classification and address goal attainment. Dr. Hawkins stated those same reports were submitted to the State Education Department. Mr. Greg Betts, representing rural school districts, spoke in opposition to A.B. 283. Mr. Betts stated he is a firm believer in recruitment and hiring the best qualified candidates. He also is a firm believer that the total staff ought to reflect the culture and ethnicity of the community served. He felt the purpose of the bill was to encourage effective recruitment but also to solve an alleged misuse of funds. Agreeing with the testimony of Dr. Hawkins and Mr. Ridgway, Mr. Betts stated the bill "flies in the face of local control" and has a negative aspect in it which seems to be punitive. If the intent is "high road" legislation to encourage better developed recruitment plans, the opposite effect may occur because of Subsections 1 and 2. Mr. Betts felt these sections could be eliminated. Any problems occurring in local recruiting is the school district's problem and can be dealt with at the local level. He agreed with Mr. Batten's suggestion regarding the bill being a resolution. Mr. Batten asked Dr. Hawkins and Mr. Ridgway if they would be in favor of a resolution to submit to all districts encouraging recruitment planning. Mr. Ridgway stated he would not oppose a resolution if there were no mandates. He would prefer to have been asked about current recruitment results and discussion on improvement from both state and local levels. He reiterated how difficult minority recruiting is due to small numbers of minority candidates and large numbers of recruiters seeking to hire those candidates. Mr. Williams stated he felt if a resolution could be supported, it meant the intention was to ignore it. Confirming a resolution can also direct, the same information can be requested. The issue is having a positive plan at the beginning. He felt the opposition was to something that could be positive with the input of many. Feeling opportunity to work together at a state level to formulate strong recruiting efforts, Mr. Williams expressed amazement at the opposition. Mr. Ridgway stated he did not say he would agree with a resolution asking to submit reports. He stated he would agree with a resolution offering suggestions for school districts to improve recruitment. Declaring his opposition was not taken from the position of the personal burden it would place on him, he explained his opposition was from his position as a personnel director in charge of recruiting, he is accountable to his Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees and the Superintendent are the ones who should deal with the issue. He reiterated his concern the demands of the bill reflect an attempt at micro management from an outside body. Mr. Williams asked why the state level recruitment dollars were accepted if state involvement in recruitment is opposed. Mr. Ridgway stated at that point in time it was not a local issue. It was an issue directed by the legislature. Involvement was at the request of the legislature to emphasize minority recruiting and it was a statewide plan. Mr. Williams pointed out this is another request from the legislature. Mr. Bennett proposed a compromise. He suggested A.B. 283 tying some triggers in. For example, if the school district is within 85% of its EEOC affirmative action goals, the report is optional. If the school district is not within 85% of the goals then the report is mandatory. Mr. Batten asked if the bill was for recruiting efforts or for recruiting minority teachers. Mr. Williams explained the general purpose of the bill is for overall recruiting. As one component, minority teacher recruitment should be addressed in the plan as well as effective and accountable recruiting. Mr. Batten felt if effective and accountable were included, some "teeth" was needed. If the purpose is to strictly recruit minority teachers, he understands the purpose. If the purpose is general recruiting, Mr. Batten felt the legislature was setting a mandate and general recruiting should be left to individual districts. No action was taken on A.B. 283. Mr. Williams announced the committee had received a conflict notice on A.B. 291 which was in direct conflict with S.B. 58. S.B. 58 has passed both the Senate and Assembly and has been sent to the Governor. Both bills amend N.R.S. 39l.032. Mr. Williams announced a hearing would be held in Las Vegas on Assemblyman Harrington's school choice bill on March 29, 1995. There being no further business before the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Barbara Prudic, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Assemblyman William Z. Harrington, Chairman Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, Chairman Assembly Committee on Education March 15, 1995 Page