2003 House Bill 4508: Revise Detroit School District governance

Legislation watch

Public Act 303 of 2004

Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next

Introduced by Rep. Bill McConico (D) on April 1, 2003, to place the continuation of the Detroit reform school board put in place by the state in 1999 on the August, 2003 primary election ballot in the city, rather than in 2004 as required under current law.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on April 1, 2003.
- Reported in the House on July 2, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-4) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on September 23, 2003.
  - Reported in the House on December 3, 2003, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-7) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on December 3, 2003, to replace the previous version of the bill with one which would impose the Detroit school governance system proposed by Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, and eliminate a November, 2004 election on Detroit school governance. See House-passed version for details of this proposal. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on December 3, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Clark Bisbee (R) on December 3, 2003, to clarify that the purpose of the "family, community, cultural, and recreational activities" created by the community assistance teams established by school board members under the Mayor's proposal would be to "promote the academic mission of the schools". The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 3, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. James Koetje (R) on December 3, 2003, to clarify provision authorizing the school board to make bylaws so as to correspond to the narrower authority granted to the board under the mayor's proposal. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on December 3, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tupac Hunter (D) on December 3, 2003, to require a vote of the people of Detroit in the August 2004 primary election on the mayor's proposal, as incorporated in the committee substitute. This amendment was introduced before the Reeves amendment, which places the issue on a March 16, 2004 special election ballot. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 3, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tupac Hunter (D) on December 3, 2003, to require a vote of the people of Detroit in a May, 2004 special election on the mayor's proposal, as incorporated in the committee substitute. This amendment was introduced before the Reeves amendment, which places the issue on a March 16, 2004 special election ballot. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on December 3, 2003.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Triette Reeves (D) on December 3, 2003, to place before Detroit voters in a March 16, 2004 special election a choice between two forms of governance for the Detroit School District. See House-passed bill for details. The amendment passed 82 to 21 in the House on December 3, 2003.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Passed 88 to 16 in the House on December 3, 2003, to eliminate a November 2004 Detroit election on whether to keep the reform school board imposed on the Detroit School District in 1999, or go back to the system in place prior to the state takeover. The bill would instead place before Detroit voters in a March 16, 2004 special election a choice between two forms of schools governance. One would give the Detroit mayor the sole power to hire and fire a school district Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who would control district operations, budget, personnel decisions, and management. An elected nine-member school board would essentially have an advisory role. This is the form of governance proposed by Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. The other choice would be to return to the system in effect prior to the 1999 imposition of a reform school board. This featured an 11-member elected school board with full control of school operations, budgets, and CEO selection.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the Senate on December 4, 2003.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on December 4, 2003.
  - Reported in the Senate on December 11, 2003, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on August 4, 2004, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that changes the proposed election date and details of the proposed school governance system. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on August 4, 2004.
Passed 26 to 12 in the Senate on August 4, 2004, to revise a November 2004 Detroit election on whether to keep the reform school board imposed on the Detroit School District in 1999, or go back to the system in place prior to the state takeover. The first option would instead be a system in which the Detroit mayor nominates a school district Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who would control district operations and approve large contracts, such as those with teachers unions. A nine-member school board elected from particular districts would have to confirm the mayor’s CEO choice (and could not unilaterally remove the CEO), would set the annual budget (but could not interfere with its execution), and would approve contracts smaller than $250,000. The other choice would be to return to the system in effect prior to the 1999 imposition of a reform school board. This featured an elected school board of 11 at-large members with full control of school operations, budgets, and CEO selection.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Received in the House on August 4, 2004.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Steve Tobocman (D) on August 4, 2004, to require a majority of at least seven of the nine school board members in the alternate governance plan on a vote to dismiss the Detroit school CEO, and eliminate the requirement that the mayor agree to the dismissal. The amendment failed 41 to 59 in the House on August 4, 2004.
  Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Passed 70 to 33 in the House on August 4, 2004, to revise a November 2004 Detroit election on whether to keep the reform school board imposed on the Detroit School District in 1999, or go back to the system in place prior to the state takeover. The first option would instead be a system in which the Detroit mayor nominates a school district Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who would control district operations and approve large contracts, such as those with teachers unions. A nine-member school board elected from particular districts would have to confirm the mayor’s CEO choice (and could not unilaterally remove the CEO), would set the annual budget (but could not interfere with its execution), and would approve contracts smaller than $250,000. The other choice would be to return to the system in effect prior to the 1999 imposition of a reform school board. This featured an elected school board of 11 at-large members with full control of school operations, budget, and CEO selection.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on August 6, 2004.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Senator Thomas' "journal statement" by Admin003 on August 5, 2004
Senator Thomas asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Thomas' statement is as follows:

Mr.President and colleagues, the bill before you gives the voters of Detroit a choice. They will have a choice this November whether or not to go back to a traditional school board, or they will have a choice to continue with a former reform. It ends the discussion of voting rights, and it begins the discussion--a very positive discussion--about what is the best way to educate kids in Detroit.

The past five years have been very painful. Clearly, you have heard the pain expressed by my colleagues. However, it is time for us to put that pain behind us and have a fair and reasonable dialog about what is the best way to educate kids in Detroit.

When you adopt this legislation, the citizens of Detroit have a choice. They have two choices, and both choices have elected school boards. So now we can have a fair and reasonable conversation about which way we think is the best way to educate kids. You're not taking away anybody's right to vote. You're not doing anything wrong. You're simply giving the voters of Detroit a choice, and we will exercise our choice. We will exercise our democracy. We will stand up, and we will vote. We will vote one way, or we will vote the other way, but we will vote and we will choose. Whether or not you support what I'm doing or not, you're simply giving the voters of Detroit a choice--a choice that they will make. We will have that discussion and we will educate kids in Detroit and we will give our city a chance to succeed.

Reply

Line

2) Senator Clark-Coleman's "journal statement" by Admin003 on August 5, 2004
Senator Clark-Coleman's statement is as follows:

Mr.President, let me just say that there's choice that someone dreamed up; someone designed for the people in the city of Detroit, and there's the choice that you promised them five years ago. Why is it that at the eleventh hour you want to change the rules of the game? If this is such a great choice, then why didn't we have this five years ago?

It looks like the citizens in the city of Detroit are being manipulated, and they are being manipulated. This is an extension of the takeover. It is perceived like that. It is opposed in my city by major groups. The Council of Baptist Pastors, 400 churches, in my city oppose this--openly oppose this. It is opposed by the NAACP who did a poll throughout our city of 1,600 people, and the majority of them opposed any change to this. It is being also opposed by organized labor. It is opposed by a number of citizen groups. They want Lansing to leave them alone. They want Lansing to allow them to make a decision. Please stop making decisions for us. I just talked a few minutes ago with the head of the NAACP. He says this is an affront; this is discriminatory. The first thing tomorrow morning, they will be out with a press conference to talk about how this is discriminatory.

We are in Detroit--this is very emotional. The sore that you created back in 1999 hasn't even healed. And once again, you are trying to open it up just a little bit wider. What is wrong with you just keeping your word and just letting us do what you promised us five years ago? Is it that you don't trust the citizens of Detroit? Are they imbeciles that they can't make a decision; you have to make a decision for us? You have to frame something for us to vote on? You did this. You created this monster, so now you want to change the head of the monster because you don't trust Detroiters to think for themselves. This is disgusting. This is insulting to my people. You ought to leave it alone. You ought to let them have their choice, and make their vote based on the legislation where you promised them five years ago: If you don't like it, you can vote to go to a fully-empowered school board.

This compromise is not a fully-empowered school board. People will run for office. They will spend a whole bunch ofmoney, they'll get in there, and they'll have no power over the superintendent to set mission goals and objectives. If theyset them, how do they enforce them? If the superintendent is answering to a mayor who will dangle him on a string, andif he doesn't do as the mayor says, he will be gone. Do you really want to take away the independence of the superintendentto be able to do his job? The superintendent ought to freed up to be able to do his job without worrying about the politics and stuff that one person can heap upon this superintendent. We are trying to protect this guy. We want to protect our children from all of this political stuff that will go with, all of sudden, allowing the mayor to control the superintendent. You know in your districts you don't allow that to happen. You know that, and you know what comes when you do that.

So I'm just asking you to treat us like you treat your communities. Oppose this bill, just leave it alone, and let us go and have the people in Detroit vote. They might vote for an appointed board, but let them. They might just keep it, but let them. They will feel better if they can make that decision. You made a promise; keep your promise. Let them go to the polls and vote as to what they want. If they vote for an appointed board, they will buy into it. They will take ownership into it. But if Lansing keeps on denying them a chance to be treated like everybody else, then you know what's going to happen. They're going to resent it. Lansing, once again, is dictating to the citizens in my city. What is it that we have to be treated so differently than your cities? You love your schools. We love our schools. We want our superintendent to be independent. You want yours to be independent. We don't want the mayor to be able to dangle him on a rope--on a string--and make him dance to his tune. If he doesn't do some political favor for somebody, then he might be out. Is that what you want to happen to the superintendent?

I'm saying to you to think about what kind of control you are giving to the mayor over the superintendent. Let the people decide. The people have been real clear that they don't want no tinkering; they don't want any tweaking; they don't want anything. They want what you promised them, which is to vote straight up either elected or appointed.

Reply

Line

3) Senator Scott's "journal statement" by Admin003 on August 5, 2004
Senator Scott's statement is as follows:

You know, the author of this bill said it was wrong in 1999 to take away their right to vote. Well, let me tell you that what you're doing here tonight is wrong. So two wrongs don't make a right, do they? Give Detroiters what you promised them in 1999.

Yes, it's term limits, but most of us were here then, and there are many of us who spoke against it at the time because the schools were doing well. But they had $1.5 billion of bonds, and folks could just see them getting all of those contracts. Well, that's what they did, and a lot of Detroiters didn't even get the contracts.

Well, you have an opportunity tonight to make that wrong that you did in 1999 to make it right. Give them what you promised them. That's why so many people don't believe in government today because we're always changing to suit ourselves. Well, give Detroiters that right to vote tonight. I'm asking my colleagues. They have a choice. You gave them that choice in 1999, and you told them they could implement it in 2004--November--just a few months away. So give them that opportunity to do that.

My colleagues, it's in your hands tonight, and I hope that you will allow them that opportunity so that they will vote; that they will believe in government once again.

Reply

Line

View Full Conversation