A York Democrat’s bill to expand the administrative process behind Maine’s public school transfer program died between chambers after the House and Senate failed to agree on a path forward for the proposal before concluding their special session last week.
Maine families looking to have their children attend a public school outside their home district may apply for what is known as a Superintendents Agreement.
Under current state law, superintendents that receive such applications are directed to determine if transferring districts is in the “best interest” of the student. All it takes is a thumbs down from either superintendent for the transfer to be blocked.
State law does not specify what actually constitutes a transfer being “in the student’s best interest,” leaving this definition almost entirely up to a given superintendent’s discretion.
Sponsored by Sen. Joe Rafferty (D-York), LD 1719 sought to modify the application and appeal process for a transfer under this program.
The amended version of this bill advanced by a majority of Education Committee members would have required parents to submit “evidence” to support their transfer request.
Superintendents would then be required to discuss the transfer request and review the evidence submitted by the parents in order to decide if the transfer is in the best interest of the child.
An official decision on the request would have needed to be rendered within thirty days.
This bill also would have amended the appeals process for denied transfer applications. If both the sending and receiving superintendents rejected a family’s request, the Commissioner of Education would have only had the authority to consider whether or not they reached their decision in “a way that was arbitrary or unreasonable.”
Otherwise, the Commissioner would review if the transfer is “in the best interest of the student and the school community.”
While all Democratic members of the Legislature’s Education Committee supported the amended version of this bill, all Republicans recommended its rejection.
After several failed attempts to advance the bill, the Senate ultimately accepted the minority Ought Not to Pass report.
The House then overwhelmingly supported the bill in a roll call vote of 83-50 where more than a dozen Republicans joined the Democrats in pushing for the bill’s passage.
Because neither chamber agreed to recede and concur — meaning that each insisted on maintaining their initial positions — the bill was considered to have died between chambers and, as a result, was placed in the legislative files.
This, however, was not the only bill introduced this past session aimed at reforming the Superintendents Agreement program.
[RELATED: This Bipartisan Bill Looks to Improve Maine’s Public School Student Transfer Program]
A bipartisan bill sponsored by Rep. Tavis Rock Hasenfus (D-Readfield) and cosponsored by Rep. Amy Bradstreet Arata (R-New Gloucester) sought to make the renewal of these agreements automatic instead of requiring families to resubmit their applications annually.
Renewals could still have been denied by the receiving superintendent, however, if the student’s attendance is irregular, the student is disruptive or does not “use best efforts to succeed in class,” or the transfer is shown to no longer be in the best interest of the student.
Much like with LD 1719, the House and the Senate could not come to an agreement about whether or not to pass the bill.
While the House accepted the Committee’s majority Ought Not to Pass report without taking a roll call vote, the Senate did the same with the minority’s Ought to Pass report.
Again, both chambers insisted on their previous positions, resulting in the bill dying between chambers.
[RELATED: Two Bills Would Strengthen School Choice for Maine Students through Superintendent Agreements]
LD 607, sponsored by Auburn Republican Rep. Laurel Libby, would have implemented changes that likely would have expanded access to the program for many Maine families.
This bill would have stipulated that a transfer may only be denied if the receiving school does not physically have the space to accept a new student, or if doing so would require additional staff.
Because transfers could only be denied on an objective basis, the existing appeals process would have been eliminated.
Both the House and the Senate went on to reject this bill in partisan roll call votes, ending its consideration for the session.
