A substitute bill for the original House Bill 1546 was approved in committee on Friday, February 18th.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill

Source:  Substitute Bill Analysis report

The original bill authorized any school district to designate Innovation Schools and Innovation Zones and then apply to the state for endorsement of innovation plans. The substitute bill creates a review and approval process by the ESD and the OSPI for up to three Innovation Schools and Innovation Zones from each ESD. The original bill required waiver of a large number of state laws and rules for any state-endorsed innovation plan. The substitute bill authorizes a specified list of waivers and allows for identification of additional waivers to be forwarded to the Legislature by the OSPI.

The original bill required the OSPI to submit as a package, requests for supplemental funding from Innovation Schools and Innovation Zones. The substitute bill provides for two rounds of applications: a first round in 2012 that must be implemented without supplemental state funds, and a second round in 2013 where supplemental state funds may be requested. For the second round, the OSPI selects and forwards to the Legislature no more than 10 applications and provides grants if funds are appropriated. The original bill allowed staff in an Innovation School or Innovation Zone to opt out of collective bargaining agreements. The substitute bill allows a school district to agree to modify agreements if necessary to implement an innovation plan. The original bill did not limit the duration of an Innovation School or Innovation Zone. The substitute bill provides that both the first and second round of designations operate for six years, and that the bill expires June 30, 2021

Staff Summary of Public Testimony in Opposition to the Original Bill

The bill outlines many things that go into creative and innovative schools. Washington is already a leader in innovation. There are over 200 schools using alternative learning experience programs, and there are digital learning programs. Innovative schools have occurred without any barriers or trouble. There is a concern that by setting up these proposal and approval processes, obstacles will be invented that currently do not exist.

The Superintendent supports innovation, but not this bill. Waiving many of the laws that are listed could have unknown or unintended consequences. The bill requires that the OSPI and the SBE make a list of laws that can be waived, but provides no authority to determine whether these laws should be waived. The provisions that allow employees in some schools to opt out of collective bargaining are largely unworkable and should be removed. There are significant concerns with allowing a waiver of provisions under chapter 28A.400 RCW, which includes such topics as employment practices, sexual misconduct, and crimes against children.

Innovation is supported, but not adding another layer of bureaucracy. This bill could only be implemented with additional resources. There is concern about waiving things like minimum graduation requirements and passing state assessments. One of the laws that could be waived is the requirement to hire fully certified teachers, which is counter to the desire to improve student achievement.

Dora