Legislation watch
- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
2007 House Bill 4592: Mandate consolidation of school noninstructional services
Public Act 63 of 2007
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Tim Melton (D) on April 5, 2007, to require school districts to transfer their procurement, human resources, busing, contracting activities and other non-instructional services to their intermediate school districts. The bill would give the Department of Education the authority to establish standards and cooperative procedures to gradually accomplish this.
- Referred to the House Education Committee on April 5, 2007.
- Reported in the House on May 22, 2007, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on May 22, 2007, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that eliminates the requirement to gradually act on a school noninstructional services consolidation plan, and instead only require districts and ISDs to make up a plan. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on May 22, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Rep. John Moolenaar (R) on May 22, 2007, to also require the consolidation plan to include employee health insurance. The amendment failed 44 to 65 in the House on May 22, 2007.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Amendment offered by Rep. Judy Emmons (R) on May 22, 2007, to also require the consolidation plan to include opportunities for cost savings that may be achieved by seeking competitive bids and privatizing noninstructional school services like busing, food service and custodians. The amendment failed 46 to 62 in the House on May 22, 2007.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"
- Referred to the House Education Committee on April 5, 2007.
- Passed 67 to 42 in the House on May 22, 2007, to require school districts to create a plan to transfer their procurement, human resources, busing, contracting activities and other non-instructional services to their intermediate school districts. The bill would not require districts and ISDs to act on the plans, or to make plans to seek competitive bids on the services.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on May 24, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on May 24, 2007.
- Reported in the Senate on August 8, 2007, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on September 4, 2007, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that requires ISDs to do the proposed consolidation study, not regular school districts. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on September 4, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Ron Jelinek (R) on September 6, 2007, to clarify that an ISD that has already done a consolidation study doesn't have to do another one. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on September 6, 2007.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Ron Jelinek (R) on September 6, 2007, to require the consolidation study report ISDs prepare to calculate cost savings on a per-district basis, not a per-student basis. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on September 6, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on May 24, 2007.
- Passed 38 to 0 in the Senate on September 6, 2007, to require Intermediate School Districts to create a plan to consolidate the procurement, human resources, busing, contracting activities and other non-instructional services of their constituent regular school districts. The bill would not require districts and ISDs to act on the plans, or to make plans to seek competitive bids on the services.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on September 6, 2007.
- Passed 81 to 25 in the House on September 11, 2007, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on September 18, 2007.
Most Recent Comments
1) consolidate high salary jobs by Anonymous Citizen on February 3, 2008I don't see the loss of local people who work in school kitchens and bus students to come first, or at all. These employees are on the low end of the pay scale. Why does every local district need to pay salary and benefits for accounting and technology? It makes me sick when these positions are preserved and retired teachers aren't replaced. Why would someone working on the local school budget eliminate their own job? They won't! This is why having the ISDs run the study is a good idea. Local communities want to save academics, athletics, and transportation. Do they care about who is doing the financing as long as it's done accurately and efficiently? I don't think so. Do they care if a local person works on the school network and computers? I don't think so. Do they want smaller class sizes and more class offerings? Yes!
Reply
Lets all start with consolidating special eduacation bussing. Turning that over to the local ISD. Does the state represenitives know that the districts that did this only did this to look good in the eyes of the goverment, "Look we are consolidating" When in fact they are just stealing more money from the state to fund the local ISD. Come on represneitives and law makers get your head out of your arss and look at what is going on.
The public school gets 28% refund for sp ed bussing while the ISD gets 70% refund. It cost more money at the ISD level because their drivers and benefits cost more than that of the public school sector. Not to mention the added miles that it takes to complete the job. The ISD will set up a contract with the local school district and charge them the 28% refund that they would have gotten from the state and in the mean time they are also collecting the 70% refund too. But they claim they will share this with the local disrict, that I will believe when I see the check cut from the ISD.
It's for the kids....... NO, its not for the kids, someone else got a raise and a pat on the back and the kids fall behind again.
Lets talk athletics, why would anyone in their right mind spend an average of 50,000.00 dollars in transportation (Class B school) for a select few students that choose to play sports. When that money could be spent else where.
How much money is being spent today? Yes student count day. This is the day the all students enjoy the positive things at school, you know pizza parties, movies, maybe games and then lets not forget the school raffles/lottery today. come to school today and we will enter your name for the selected prizes purchased from that wonderful fund, yes the general fund. It's that there to educate students not provide them with lavish gifts just to come to school today so they may be counted.
It is just one thing after another people, wake up!!!
Reply
If you want to save money in schools limit the amount of athletics. Don't need to spend money on busing kids all over the state to "PLAY BALL"???? Waste. Look at the cost of fuel, driver with benefits, a sub driver to take the place of a regular driver who now is on an athletic outing.
Bus maintenance (added miles for athletics). The cost of Uniforms, ballfield football field maintenance. Swimming pool maintenance. ON and On and On. Lets not forget the coachs pay! Wake up lets educate our kids with the money we waste on sports.
Reply
View Full Conversation
