Rest of Report

From my notes:

Additional information on the question of cost of implementation to state:
• Additional $3 million appropriated after initial $1.7 million, but some of the $1.7 was used to balance budget
• Student data software $1 million

Picking up from Nancy:

Q. (Finch) Must units be contiguous?
No.
Q. What is the last date units have to meet to avoid the penalty for 2009-2010?
The law states Jan. 30, 2009. Commissioner can’t change it.
Q. But legislature could. Would that be a competing measure?
Need a lawyer to answer that.

Q. (Nelson) At 200 units. Will you continue to try to reduce that?
Can keep working. The law targets 80, but also states that Commissioner can not disapprove a plan if it results in more than 80.
Q. Are the penalties forever?
Yes, as long as a unit is nonconforming.
Q. Will there be any incentives?
Hopes there will be. Now for the first time there are units with more than 1 high school; should provide new opportunities for education. (I heard a partial phrase “struggle with reductions”). Will adjust labor markets for new units.

(Weston) referred to earlier comment about Sinclair Act and notes that it was not a mandate.
The reorganized units plus the noncompliant ones total less than half of the school population. Over half did not have to consolidate in order to comply with the law.

Q. (Richardson) About competing labor markets?
We (includes Silvernail), will do analysis and come up with new numbers.

Q. (McFadden) Should be 1.0 statewide. Will there be more than 31?
Don’t know until do analysis and numbers. Then it is up to you to decide.

Chairman Sutherland brought session to a close and remainder will be rescheduled.