Maine’s House and Senate have been going back and forth for the past couple of weeks over whether or not to adopt a bill aiming to reduce friction within the state’ public school choice program by automatically extending the agreements that allow students to attend schools outside their districts.
As it currently stands, the House has adopted the Committee’s majority Ought Not to Pass report without taking a roll call vote, meanwhile the Senate rejected this recommendation in a tied roll call vote before adopting the minority Ought to Pass report.
LD 218 has now been sent back to the House where it was tabled and has repeatedly been carried forward as “unfinished business.”
Some Maine students are granted the ability to attend a public school outside of their home district through what is known as a Superintendent Agreement.
Although current state law requires these contracts to be reviewed annually, a bipartisan bill introduced earlier this month would allow these agreements to automatically be renewed each year.
While these agreement could still be terminated under certain circumstances — for example, if a student is not regularly attending class or is consistently disruptive — making renewal automatic would ease the process for many Maine families making use of this program.
LD 218 — sponsored by Rep. Tavis Rock Hasenfus (D-Readfield) and cosponsored by Rep. Amy Bradstreet Arata (R-New Gloucester) — has resulted in a rare degree of push and pull between the House and Senate.
Under Maine State Law, a student may transfer from one school administrative unit to another with the approval of the superintendents from both the student’s home district and the district that the students wants to attend.
Both superintendents must agree that the transfer is “in the student’s best interest” and may only be completed with the approval of a student’s parent or guardian.
All it takes for a student to be denied a transfer, however, is a thumbs-down from one of the superintendents involved.
The governing statutes do not specify what constitutes a transfer being “in the student’s best interest,” leaving this language almost entirely up to a given superintendent’s interpretation.
The Maine Department of Education (MDOE) website recommends some additional factors that superintendents may consider when deciding whether or not to approve a transfer, including the availability of space and the potential impact of the transfer.
For example, the MDOE suggests that “consistency may be in the best interest of students” nearing the end of their high school career, meaning that superintendents may want to approve or deny transfer requests or renewals on this basis.
A parent or guardian may appeal the denial of a transfer to the Maine Commissioner of Education and, ultimately, to the Maine Board of Education.
Under the current rules, these agreements are only valid for one year and must be renewed annually for a student to continue attending an out-of-district school.
During a public hearing held in early April, testimony was offered by those representing the interests of school districts and the Maine State Board of Education in opposition to this bill, arguing that it would restrict administrators’ ability to effectively weigh key factors on a year-to-year basis.
“This approach fails to account for the ever-changing dynamics within our schools. Enrollment patterns fluctuate, staffing levels vary, and the financial landscape shifts from year to year,” said Matthew Cyr of RSU 34. “By removing the ability to re-evaluate agreements on an annual basis, districts may find themselves unable to effectively manage class sizes, budget constraints, and programming for all students.”
“We also worry that if districts must automatically renew student transfer agreements, administrators may be more hesitant to approve these agreements in the first place,” said the Maine School Management Association (MSMA). “Without assurances about building capacity, staffing, and other factors from year-to-year, it might be more difficult for an administrator to commit that an agreement will be in a child’s best interest.”
Similarly, the Maine Principals Association (MPA) argued that a student’s circumstances may have changes from one year to the next thereby making the transfer agreement no longer in the student’s best interest.
Those in support of the bill appeared to disagree with the merits of these concerns.
“This bill does not require superintendents to enter into initial agreements, and allows removal of students who disrupt the education of others,” said bill co-sponsor Rep. Arata. “It merely preserves stability for students who already have transfer agreements, and ends the yearly stress and uncertainty for students and parents.”
“Many superintendents renew agreements yearly and put the needs of children first. However, some may end an agreement due to reasons that have nothing to do with the children,” she said. “l have seen this first hand in my previous position on the Board of Education. This bill ought to pass because educational stability, regardless of their parents’ wealth or abilities as advocates, is in the best interest of Maine children.”
A public policy group agreed.
“Consistency in education is critical to academic success. Frequent changes in school placements can negatively impact a student’s academic performance, social integration, and emotional well-being,” said the Maine Policy Institute (MPI). “Automatically renewing these agreements fosters parental involvement in education and ensures that students are not arbitrarily forced back into a school environment that may not best serve their interests.”
“Additionally, this bill will alleviate the administrative workload for school districts by reducing the number of transfer renewals that must be reviewed individually each year,” MPI argued. “By focusing resources on other critical areas, schools can better serve students and improve the quality of education across the state.”
Following this public hearing, members of the Education and Cultural Affairs Committee reported out a partisan majority Ought Not to Pass Report, with all Republican members backing the minority Ought to Pass Report.
On May 27, the Senate was tied over whether or not to pass LD 218, with three Democrats joining a unanimous group of Republicans in support of the bill, meaning that the motion to accept the majority Ought Not to Pass Report failed.
Two days later, the Senate accepted the minority Ought to Pass Report without taking a roll call vote, sending LD 218 back to the House in non-concurrence.
The House tabled the bill on June 3 and has repeatedly carried it forward as unfinished business since then.
Click Here for More Information on LD 218
Disclosure: The Maine Wire is a project of the Maine Policy Institute.
