Replies

I think people should engage in a long term discussion and study what happened in CA, after CA implemented the same state law - and later found out no amount of money was ever enough; unqualified teachers were constantly being hired; and the poortest children suffered the most. Finally, even though this is still the state law in CA, local districts are asking for waivers and bakcing away from it constantly.

FL does have a law allowing a "charter school district" category, whereby, each public school district requesting such status is exempt from certain state laws. The idea is that this will enable the school districts to regain more local control, and be able to move ahead more quickly with student achievement and innovation. Orange County, in Orlando, was recently granted "charter school district" status by FL.

Since this amendment was actually opposed by all the superintendents, principals and some teachers, especially art and music teachers (who fear they will be the first to lose their classroom space and/or their jobs), maybe there will be a huge increase in the number of applications to FL for "charter school district" status, with all these school districts asking for a waiver from this new state law.

Because that is exactly where CA's school districts are right now with this - trying to find legal ways to be waived from compliance.

Re my post #15 and CA:

Money also matters
[How CA's landmark law to reduce class size was a disaster for poor students]

poortest = poorest

Didn't Jeb say outright, before the election, that if this amendment was voted in that he would HAVE to raise taxes?

Seems to me that "the people" have gotten exactly what they asked for.

Hey, summer, wanted to ask you about this, but also wanted to let you bask in the glow of your victory for a while! :- )

Everyone I know is hopping mad about this. What I'd like to see is a movement to reconsider this matter. Could something be put on the ballot in 2 years?

Unfortunately, we only just now simultaneously passed the amendment requiring a pricing of such proposed changes -- before they are voted upon. This is exactly the sort of thing that should have been done on this school amendment. Granted, it was central to Jeb's argument and helped him to point out McBride's shortcomings and vague ideas, but there's still lots of stupid, uninformed people out there, who probably were totally unaware of the enormous cost. Those pinheads apparently said, "hey, sounds good to me, I vote yes!" This proposal sounds GOOD to ALL of US, but we can also add 2 + 22 billion, or so.

And what's the deal with solid "yes" votes across the line on all amendments? These votes were just insane!!!

maybe there will be a huge increase in the number of applications to FL for "charter school district" status, with all these school districts asking for a waiver from this new state law.

Is it really possible for all or most of the districts to achieve charter status, and legally be exempt from the amemdment? It seems to me that the courts would eventually strike this down as a ploy to avoid the law.

Barring this approach, I think the only hope is for districts to use portables for the short term until the matter can be put before the voters again after we learn the actual costs, and let them decide to either scrap the idea or approve a new funding source.

Even though I support vouchers, I don't think they would help much in funding this amendment since even if many students leave for the private sector, there would be little savings to the public school by their departure since the per pupil costs will rise dramatically, and the state would also have to foot the added bill for the vouchers.

BTW, Orlando is in Orange County, not the other way around. ;-)

Good point on the CA stuff. We tried year-round schooling in FL after it failed in CA. Maybe we ought to take notes from other states.