STATE OF GEORGIA SELECT COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
Transcripts of Meetings 1977-1981
MMITTEE MEMBERS:
ORGE BUSBEE ;OVERNOR :HAIRMAN
_L MILLER .IEUTENANT GOVERNOR
OMAS B. MURPHY ;PEAKER. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
'BERT H. JOROAN :HIEF JUSTICE. SUPREME COURT
(ELLEY QUILLIAN :HIEF JUDGE. COURT OF APPEALS
:HAEL J. BOWERS \TTORNEY GENERAL
,RCUS B. CALHOUN SENIOR JUDGE. SUPERIOR COURTS
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
ROOM 23H 47 TRINITY AVENUE ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30334
404/6567158
COMMITTEES MEMBERS:
AL HOLLOWAY SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE
JACK CONNEL.L. SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
ROY E. BARNES CHAIRMAN. SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
WAYNE SNOW. JR. CHAIRMAN. HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
FRANK H. EDWARDS SPECIAL COUNSEL
J. ROBIN HARRIS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
MELVIN B. HILL., JR. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
MEETINGS HELD ON CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
COMMITTEE
Full Committee Subcommittee Full Committee Full Committee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee Full Committee Ad Hoc Committee Full Committee
DATE
October 24, 1979 November 8, 1979 November 13, 1979 May 22, 1980 May 22, 1980 May 22, 1980 May 22, 1980 June 10, 1980 June 19, 1980 June 24, 1980 July 10, 1980 July 16, 1980 July 17, 1980 July 28, 1980 July 31, 1980 August 12, 1980 August 18, 1980 August 21, 1980 september 4, 1980 September 9, 1980 September 23, 1980 October 16, 1980 October 21, 1980
11 OF PAGES
113 85 98 45 17 49 23 94 93 93 97 70 78
175 95 69
101 60 84 60
120 106 143
PAGE 1
2
STATE OF GEORGIA
3
COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
4
OF THE
5
CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA
6
7
8
9
10
Czl 11 l-
oe<
Q.
12 ~
~~ r~ ~ ! 14 I':<"zl:: 15 .:> Cl e< ::> 16 ~ Q z
17 :
SUBCOMMITTEE 2 ON LOCAL SCHOOL SYSTEMS
18
19
20
21 Room 401-A State Capitol
22 Atlanta, Georgia
23 Thursday, July 10, 1980 10:00 a.m.
24
25
PRESENT:
2
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
3
CHAIRMAN DONALD THORNHILL
DOLORES COOK
4
JOSEPH GREENE
5
6
7
8
9
10
"z
11 ;:::
.'o.."...
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 ... ':"r 15 .:> "'::"> 16 ~... cz 17 ::;
ALSO PRESENT:
MELVIN B. HILL, JR. VICKIE GREENBERG MICHAEL HENRY JERRY GRIFFIN CLARK STEVENS JENNYE GUY PETE HACKNEY JIM MULLINS CHARLES PYLES CAL ADAMSON ROBERT WOODARD
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
PRO C E E DIN G S
2
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We will go on and get started,
3 we are running a little bit late.
4
We have some of our committee members who have not
5 arrived yet.
6
Those members of the committee that are here, I am
7 Don Thornhill, I am the Chairman of this subcommittee, and
8 Mr. Joe Greene from McDuffie County, and Mrs. Dolores Cook
9 are here, and the rest of the members of our committee have
10 not arrived or have complications that are not going to be
11
"z
I-
here.
.'o."....
~ 12 ~
We have been following a format with a decision
~F~ agenda, and each member of the committee has gotten one for
! 14 today I believe, and today we're going to be lookingat items
I-
'"
::I:
15 ~ that deal with the financing of school systems primarily,
"'":::I
16 ~... and the staff has very graciously been able to obtain some
Q
Z
17 = speakers for us today to talk about some of these issues,
18 and I would like to say that maybe if we would just follow
19 the procedure that we did last time, we will let our speakers
20 speak to the various points, and I believe they have kind of
21 keyed their remarks to the decision agenda. Is that right,
22 Vickie?
23
MS. GREENBERG: Yes, that's right.
24
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Then after we have our
25 speakers, we will take just a short break and then the
PAGE 4
committee can get back and go down the decision agenda and
2 express our feelings that way, and then let the staff take
3 what we do today and and work that into a proposed draft.
4
We have received in the mail a copy of a propos~d
5 draft of the school districts, the makeup of the boards of
6 education, the superintendents and changes in the school
7 boards and the superintendency in independent scnool systems,
8 powers of the boards to contract with each other. You have
9 received that in the mail already.
10
III Z
11 I-
o..0..<..
~ 12 ~
~ri ! 14 IU'l <:zl:: 15 01) III 0< ;;;) 16 ~... o Z 17 l<lli:
What I thought we would do is rather than to get into the proposed draft today would be that let's look at what we have scheduled for today, go through the decision agenda, let the staff agairi work up a proposed draft on that one.
We have one other section that we want to take a look at, and that is special schools; we'll do that at our next meeting and follow pretty much the same format with a
18 decision agenda and have someone to come and speak concerning
19 that, and let the staff fix up a proposed draft.
20
Then we can look at the total proposed draft at that
21 time, and that will pretty well wind up our task, we'll be
22 ready to go and make our report to the total committee.
23
Maand I were discussing some tentative meeting
24 dates and, as you know, we are looking down the barrell of
25 a deadline to be finished, our total committee to be finished
PAGE 5
by September -- is that right, Mel?
2
MR. HILL: Yes.
3
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: So what we're looking at in
4 terms of dates, possible dates, would be to meet again on
5 the 31st, Thursday the 31st, and to look at the special
6 school section; and then on August the 21st to look at, to
7 review the total proposed draft of what we're looking at OIl
8 the various sections; and then on Thursdsay September the itth
9 to kind of wrap up our subcommittee's work, Is that right,
10 Mel?
"z
11 ~
MR. HILL: Yes.
e ,- io
Go
12 ~
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Joe, do you and Mrs. Cook see
anything, any complications with that schedule?
14 ~~
ell
<il
:I:
15 ~
":":>"
16 ~ Q z <il
17:
MRS. COOK: I don , t, MR. GREENE: Not with the tentative date of August 21st and September the 4th, those dates are fine with me. I do have a possible conflict with the July 31st, but I can't
18 say for sure this morning.
19
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: What other date? How about the
20 30th? That's on a Wednesday.
21
MR. GREENE: I am tentatively scheduled to be in
22 Tampa on business from the 30th through the 1st, tentatively
23 now, and I can't -- P1eaee go on with your meeting because
24 I can't even be -- I can't even confirm that at this point.
25
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay.
PAGE 6
Well, I might even have a possible conflict myself
-',i;
2 which I hope I won't on the 21st, and since you are the vice
3 chairman of this committee why don't we go on and schedule it
4 the way that I have just suggested -- I know I can be here on
5 the 31st, and if you can't, we'll swap off and I'll let you
6 be in charge on the 21st if I don't make it. How about that?
7
MR. GREENE: Fine. Very good.
8
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think I'm going to be there,
9 though ..
10
"z
.11 i= 0...
12
@rl 14 ! lo-n <l ::t 15 ~ " :::l 16 .lzZ..l 0 Z 17 <l lZl
Okay. Why don't we get right on into our business at hand today and, Mel, do you want to introduce our guests, or Vickie, would you introduce our guests and take it from this point?
MS. GREENBERG: We have today Mr. Pete Hackney who is the legislative budget analyst, and Mr. Clark Stevens who is the director of the state office of Planning and Budget, and they have been gracious enough to study our decision
18 agenda, and they're going to address the issues,
19
Should we read the issue and then have them res~ond
20 to it?
21
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think that would be good.
22
Before we do that, we have some other people
23 visiting with us. I see Dr. Jim Mullins over here who is
24 with the Educational Improvement Council, and you were with
25 us last time, and please forgive me .-
PAGE 7
MS. GUY: I am J ennye Guy wi th the Urban Study
2 Institute.
3
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: All right.
4
MR. GRIFFIN: I am Jerry Griffin, Georgia Municipal
5
Assol~iation.
6
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We are very happy to have
7 these folks with us.
8
MS. GREENBERG: Then later Dr. Cal Adamson will be
9 coming in to speak to the decison agenda also.
10
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Do you want to go down that?
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. Question 1, "Should the
state be required to assume a greater responsibility for the
financing of public education?" and "If yes, in what manner?"
Who would like to address that question first?
MR. HACKNEY: I'll be glad to take first pass at
this one if you WQuld like,
I honestly don't see how our office can have an
18 opinion on this. I have my own personal opinion on it as a
19 private citizen, but our office has no opinion on it.
20
I feel that to avoid a chaotic situation such as
21 California faced with the Serrano decision, Texas faced with
22 St. Regis and so forth the state is going to have to do
23 something to ensure that the quality of education provided
24 statewide i.s more uniform than apparently it is based on all
25 reports that our office received and you read in the news-
PAGE 8
papers and so forth, and property tax which-is about the
2 only source available to local government doesn't seem to be
3 the place that additional funding can come from to achieve
4 this uniformity.
5
That being the case, I assume that over a period of
6 time the state is going to have to assume a greater responsi-
7 bility. I don't think that this is contrary to the recent
8 actions of the Georgia General Assembly nor those of
9 Governor Busbee.
10
It apparently was contrary to the thoughts of the
former Governor of Georgia before Mr, Busbee tock office
who was a big believer in boosting the required local effort
and was quoted correctly on several occasions in the Atlanta
newspapers and other places as being an advocate of a larger
required local effort, but then with the locals having nothing
but a property tax base primarily to fund the cost of local
education and with obviously more money required to bring
18 about these requirements, yes, I think yes, they must assume
19 a larger responsibility.
20
Where the money comes from, that's a matter for the
21 General Assembly to address, obviously.
22
MR. HILL: Would you be in favor of a provision in
23 the constitution that stated that something to that effect,
24 that the state shall assure that uniformity in quality of
25 education for the citizens is provided or some such language
PAGE 9
to encourage a greater attention to this?
2
MR. HACKNEY: The constitution already I think gees
3 in this direction where it speaks in two different areas
4 within this article to the effect that the state will provide
5 an adequate program of education. What's adequate?
6
Either fortunately or unfortunately the constitution
7 doesn't tend to define that, depending on where you're coming
8 from.
9
I would like to see something -- I am not sure
10 that the constitution itself should attempt to spell out a
" 11 ~z formula or a percentage or even the specific fund sources
o......
~ ~ ~ 1~2. ~~
for is
the educational program better left to statute.
in Georgia. I really believe Perhaps, though, it could
this
! 14 recognize what you're speaking of that the state will ensure I':"r
15 ~ that it will be done. that it will be adequate.
"~
;:)
16 ~
I think it would be a mistake for the state to pay
zQ
17:
the whole tab.
I think perhaps we would want the constitution
18 to reflect the thought that there will be local involvement
19 through participation from local sources, but beyond that.
20 no, sir. I don't think I would want to see -- I've got nn
21 awful lot of formulas that I like, I've seen some other folks,
22 and I guess we all do that. Mel. but I just don't feel it
23 would be the thing to do to put it in the constitution.
24 There's toomany things already in the constitution which are
25 outdated such as the acquisition. for example. on unrelated
PAGE 10
subjects of motor vehicles for state use. You know, the
2 thing about the Governor is entitled to one automobile which
3 is provided by -- I believe it says the Georgia State Patrol.
4
You see, we didn't have Department of Public Safety
5 then, it still says Georgia State Patrol, and it says and
6 such motorcycles as he shall require. When that was put ih
7 motorcycles were the means of traffic enforcement, traffic
8 control. Now I guess if my kids looked at it they would
9 think it had something to do with Hondas, what's the
10
zCI 11 j:
a.oa..:..
~ 12 ~
~r~! 14 ... ':"z: 15 ~ aC:I ;;;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 :;
Governor going to do with Hondas? I'm not sure we need a formula in the constitution.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: You know, the very first paragraph in Article VIII says, you know, the provision of an adequate education for the citizens shall be the primary, be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia, the expense of which shall be provided by taxation .
MR. HACKNEY: It doesn't say whose tax, whether
18 it's local tax or state~
19
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: That's right.
20
MR. HACKNEY: But when you whizz on over to a
21 couple of pages later let me see if I can find it -- yeah,
22 here it is, it's over in my little book on page 69, it would
23 be Section VIII -- I have to put my specs on to see, does
24 that look like three I's or one? yes, Section VIII where
25 it says the General Assembly shall by taxation provide
PAGE 11
funds for an adequate education for the citizens of Georgia,
2 so the General Assembly doesn't provide property tax now
3 I know there is a property tax, you know, they allow the
4 counties and municipalities to levy, and there is of course a
5 one-quarter of a mill maximum property tax that the state
6 levies, but that's a drop in the bucket toward providing
7 education.
8
Now, it doesn't say all. I penciled in on here, it
9 doesn't say shall provide by taxation all funds. Now, did
10 they mean all funds? Lord only knows; I don't.
MR. HILL: I guess I was thinking whether that
statement, whether you feel that statement about an adequate
education should be broadened to address the equal educa-
tional opportunity question, the language itself, or would we
be better off
MR. HACKNEY: If the state provides an adequate
education, I assume adequate would be equal allover the
18 state. Now, if somebody wants to provide something beyond
19 adequate, I suppose that should be left up to local discre-
20 tion, but without a definition of what's adequate you all
21 have got a hell of a problem here, you know.
22
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Jim, do you have anything you
23 want to say about that?
24
MR. MULLINS: No, sir. I'll be quiet.
25
MS. GREENBERG: Is there any other input from the
PAGE 12
committee?
2
l:;
Mr. Stevens, do you have any comments?
3
MR. STEVENS: We have done quite a bit of work in
4 this area over the last two or three years working with both
5 tax changes and with the local school systems, and I would
6 like to give you a few points, make a few points about this
7 whole area.
8
First of all, there is one statistic that permeates
9 all these questions that you're going over, and it's quite
10 staggering, and it's simply this, that based on rankings
1:1 Z
11
j:
'0.."....
of the states on the latest information we have expenditures
@ r l12 '" per pupil for public education in Georgia out of the fifty states and the District of Columbia we rank 51st; we are
! 14 I-
spending the least per pupil of any state in these United
':"r
15 ~
1:1
States in elementary and secondary educatlon, that is in total
'";;;)
16 I.z.I.I funds, local funds, state funds and federal funds .
Q
Z
'" 17 III
As long as we '.re at that low base, you know, it's
18 difficult to tak about shares and some of these other
19 questions listed in this paper for public education, e1e-
20 mentary and secondary in Georgia, per pupil expenditure is
21 phenominal1y low even compared to, you know, say some mid-
22 range states which are spending some forty to fifty percent
23 more per pupil than we're spending in Georgia.
24
That's not the state, but it's state, local and
25 federal.
PAGE 13
Now, historically if you're interested in the
2 question about state versus local expenditures we can go back,
3 I went back and researched certain areas of that in the '58-
4 '59 school year, the percentage breakout of expenditures
5 worked like this: Federal, 4.8 percent; state, 66,2 percent;
6 local, 29 percent.
7
Now, that's saying that the state provided about
8 two-thirds, the localabout one-third, and the federal only
9 4,8 percent, and if you look in the '58-'59 at the percentage
10 of local versus state by taking the federal out of it local
CzI
11 ~ government was financing about 30,S percent of the cost for
o
lL
~ ~ ~ _12. ~~
public education, Now. carrying that
forward to
this
year or
to
the
14 ~ school year for which we have the latest complete data which
'"
:I:
15 ~ is '79, the federal share has risen from 4.8 percent to 13.8 CI D/ :::J
16 ~ percent, the state's share has decreased as a percentage from 17 az~ 66.2 percent in '58-'59 to 51,7 percent -- in other words,
18 from about two-thirds to about half of the total cost.
19
The local share conversely has gone up from 29
20 percent to 34.5 percent, such that if you pullout the federal
21 money and look at the local cost, not local cost but local
22 expenditures including enrichment, including all factors,
23 local school systems in the school year '58_'59 was 30.5
24 percent, last year was 40 percent, so they've gone from 30
25 percent to 40 percent over that some IS-year or some 20-yeaR
PAGE 14
period.
'(
2
-;
So what this shows is that the local governments as
3 a percentage of total expenditures, their cost is rising
4 in comparison to the state's local cost in percentage. I
5 think that's an important factor.
6
Now, property taxes, or at least our per pupil
7 expenditure to show you where we're coming from has risen
8 472 percent from 1958 to 1979, and our -- the relativity of
9 personal income to, per pupil expenditures has remained about
10 the same, it hasn't changed that much. In other words, as
..zc.:l
11 j: our income as risen our per pupil expenditure has risen in
..0....
.12 the state, but they have maintained about the same overall
@ r l ratio over a 20-year period.
! 14 ...
Now, the question is should the state be required
':"z:
.15 ~ to assume a greater responsibility for financing public c.:l
;;;)
16 .IzI.>. education, and like Mr. Hackney was saying this is a subject
..Q
Z
17 II> you have to be very, very careful with.
18
Let's assume that we pick up the cost, let's pick
19 up the cost. Okay. The state right now is spending about
20 a billion dollars, about 53 or 54 percent of our budget goes
21 to education which will include elementary, secondary and
22 higher education as well.
23
We spend about a billion dollars on elementary and
24 secondary; local school systems on a 60-40 ratio here are
25 spending about, say we'll round it off and say about $600
1
PAGE 15
million. Okay.
2
So if you want to pick up the local school systems'
3 cost and write that into the constitution the price tag
4 financially is $600 million, right? Wrong, it's much more,
5
If you pick up the expenditures of all local school
6 sytems as they currently exist, the pure ticket is $600
7 millio~, but the ethical or moral or court-required pickup
8 would be at least another 400 million, at least another 400
9 million for this reason:
10
z~ 11 ~
~
0 w~
12 ~
@rl ! 14 ~ ~ ~ 4 15 ~ ~ ~ 16 mz~ w 0 Z ~ 17 m~
DeKalb County is about say the 94th or 95th percentile, they raise more money per mill, when the/raise the mill they generally raise much more money than Richmond County or some of the others, they have tremendous enrichments in some of these counties.
If the state assumes those responsibilities for education the courts, and rightly so, would not let the state give this disparity in funds out among the state, we would
18 have to equalize, so when you start writing in the words
19 equalization the state should assume a greater responsibility,
20 and I'm assuming you mean to carry our percentage of the
21 cost more and more. and the percentage of the cost to the
22 counties less and less.
23
If that's the case, you carry it on out to fulfill
24 the constitutional requirement. your'ticket is a billion
25 dollars, so we're collecting at the state level now around
PAGE 16
$3 billion, we have around a $3 billion budget let's say,
:~
2 so you're looking at a 33 percent increase in some source of
3 state taxation whether it be income tax, sales tax or some
4 other tax in order to foot the bill for what your goal is.
5
In other words, your goal is -- you can say words
6 like more nearly equalized, but if you use the words should
7 equalize what you're saying is the state should spend in
8 today's monetary terms a billion dollars at some point down
9 in the future.
10
"z
11 j:
e ; ;oa~ .... ! 14 ~ '<:"zl: 15 ~ "~ ~ 16 .~.. az <l 17 ~
Mr. Hackney made the statement that we're probably at some point going to have to equalize or approach equalization, and I think he's right. I think in the long term scheme of things we're going to have to probably do that because disparity is becoming gravely worse by the minute.
The statistics show back earlier and to date show that counties like Appling, DeKalb can raise a mill and generate X amount, and a county like Troup or some small
18 county can raise a mill, and the disparity based on the wealth
19 of the county used to be tremendous, but now it's absolutely
20 staggering the difference between what one mill will raise
21 in one county and what it will raise in another county, and
22 this will continue to become more complicated and grave
23 time goes by.
24
So in thelong run you're probably going to have to,
25 I think as a minimum to try to approach equalizatton in some
PAGE 17
manner, keeping in mind that if you do you really kill two
2 birds with one stone, that is our per pupil expenditures if
3 the locals continue to increase will put in much more money,
4 our per pupil expenditures will go up, and at the same time we
5 can do something toward equalization, but the price tag on
6 that will be very, very expensive to the public in the way
7 of additional taxation necessary to carry the billion dollars
8 in today's terms.
9
I would like to make a few more points relative to
.;c,
10
Czl 11 j:
'0."".". 12 '"
.@-IJ,I 14 >IUI :r 15 ~ Cl 16 :..'z>."... 17 .'cz.".
this. The constitution, you shouldn't specify a mechanism
in the constitution -- I heard Mr. Hackney, but I think you could speak to some broad goals, some broad general goals about individual rights, governmental responsibilities, but not about any kind of funding formula.
I am real concerned that if we do that, if we write this into the constitution that our state courts may come back
18 on us with this equalization that we really can't afford
19 right now unless the people are willing to pay, and any kind
20 of constitutional amendment has that broad goal of equa1iza-
21 tion in it, I think what goes with that, what would go with
22 that would be a tremendous statewide education on letting
23 them know what they're voting on.
24
You know, fine, if people want to vote on
25 equalization, you know, the price tag is a 33 percent increase
PAGE 18
in your taxes carried to its extreme in today's terms, and
2 the education process will take place with that, but just to
3 put it in as a statement, just to slip it in as a statement,
4 have it voted on without much impetus behind it from the
5 legislature, the Governor, the legislators, the educators,
6 a complete almost revolution of the state would be a travesty
7 on the people in my opirlDn, and I think that -- I agree with
8 Pete, you've got a problem here.
9
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Excuse me. When you sayan
10 increase in the people's taxes you're talking about an increas
11
"z
:;;
in
the income
taxes
or some
other
taxation
that's
channeled
..o....
e--~12 ~ into the state government? That's what you're saying? MR. STEVENS,: I'm not even saying that. I'm saying
14 ~ from somewhere.
I-:I<rI
15 ~
The money could be generated locally, you know, to
"<It
;:)
16 ~ put equity into it. One county can go to 25 mills overnight
z -<
17 : or whatever if they have a constitutional referendum paste
18 20 and, be equal in per student expenditure as they are in
19 DeKalb County or Fulton County or some of these other places;
20 it can be accomplished that way, but, you know, politically --
21
MR. HACKNEY: You're saying something like expand
22 the state program for education, and then also enlarle the
23 required local effort, something of that nature that comes
24 into the state for distribution in some form?
25
Mr ..STEVENS: The only states that don't use property
PAGE 19
tax for taxation would be, weI!, like Lousiana, they just
2 passed a couple of years ago a $50,000 homestead exemption
3 which because they have the oil and gas severance tax they
4 virtually eliminated property taxes in Louisiana as a funding
5 source, and we don't have that, but there are a few states --
6 by and large the states depend on the property tax to finance
7 education in the country.
8
The cost on this is what the st~ggering part is
9 in the education process, and are the people in Georgia
10 willing to pay for equalized education. That's your real
z~
11 ~ ~
question here.
0
~ w
@r l12 ~
If they are, they're willing to vote on that, ~hey'r~
Willing to pay for it through the constitution, you know,
! 14 ~
that's your issue at hand.
I feel like it's really a
~
~
%
15 ~ programmatic issue, granted, but it's also because of the
~
~
16
=~
z
w
magnitude
in
dollars
a
financial
issue
for
the
people.
Q
Z
~
= 17 ~
MR. HILL: The only goal statement that we would
18 have at the present time I think is the adequate education
19 statement, the provision of an adequate education shall be
20 required.
21
Do you feel any changing in that wording would open
22 the door to some kind of a court case or judicial mandate of
23 equalization such as happened in California, New Jersey and
24 some of these other places so that you really would, you
25 would really be somewhat worried about a change in the
PAGE 20
language, a broadening of that provision, that goal?
<,
2
MR. STEVENS: Yes.
3
MR. HENRY: Based on your statements, could you say
4 that in order to adequately fund the District Power Equaliza-
5 tion law would take around $400 million?
6
MR. STEVENS: DPE, which is not in the constitution,
7 it's under the statutes, is set up at ninety percentile, so 8 you're looking at --
9
You see, you wouldn't want --
,
10
v'
ezl
11 i=
0.'0"... 12 '"
@rl ! 14 ... ':"z: 15 oll el '";;;) 16 .zlD.. 0z 17 '"lD
Well, let me explain to you how that works. The district power equalization is under statutes authorized as part of APEG. What it allows is that if the county raises a mill, the taxation because of the wealth of the county digest doesn't generate the same dollars per mill as say DeKalb County, then the proposition is the state would come in and give the county, say to the county "Here's a check because you're poor, here's a check to get you up to the
18 same per mill rate that DeKalb would generate," for
19 example.
20
DPE is based around ninety percentile, which is
21 supposed to be sort of a -- you don't want to go to Appling
22 because they've got a big power plant in Appling, you
23 see, and you wouldn't want to really compare them, but
24 the ninety percentile, the price tag on that now is around
25 $300 million, and as currently authorized under law it's
PAGE 21
been funded, the ticket on that is about 300 million.
2
MR. HENRY: Do you think that's a better way to go
3 than to mandate equalization in the constitution?
4
MR. STEVENS: Yes. I think any kind of financing
5 of education ought to be left entirely to the General
6 Assembly working, you know, with the Governor obviously and
7 within the framework of the laws. I don't think the
8 financing of public education ought to be spelled out in the
9 constitution. That's my personal opinion.
..
10
"z
11 l-
..I0..Z..
12 IZ
@rl 14 ! l'" :r 15 ~ "IZ ;:) 16 z.I.I.I 0z 17 IZ III
Here again, it may not reflect the views of the legislature or the Governor or anybody else.
MR. HENRY: What tax source, would you want to earmark a tax source to fund that, or would you just rather see it come out of general state funds if it's available?
MR. STEVENS: It's really not for me to say. I wouldn't want to offer an opinion on behalf of the Office of Planning and Budget on that, whether we should earmark a tax.
18
Generally I'm opposed to earmarking taxes to
19 individual purposes, and that would include motor fuel taxes.
20
That's all the information I had to offer on that
21 particular subject.
22
MS. GREENBERG: If there are no more questions or
23 comment on Question 1, let's go to question 2.
24
"Should the local property tax continue to be the
25 primary source of revenue for local school systems", and,
PAGE 22
"If not, what source of revenue should be utilized?"
~;~
2
MR. HACKNEY: As I think you've inferred from what
3 Mr. Stevens said earlier, it's not the primary source of
4 revenue for most local school systems in the state. Perhaps
5 it is for some. The state is the primary source of revenue
6 for most local school systems within the state. In the
7 metropolitan districts local funds or local pzoperty taxes
8 are the primary source.
9
So perhaps with that in mind we could modify the
,:~.
10 question slightly to say should the local property tax
1:1 Z
11 l- continue to be a major source or a significant source of '0.."....
@ r l12 '" revenue for local school systems. Once again, as Mr. Stevens observed, that's a
! 14 difficult thing to answer. I'm sure there are some people l-
':"r
15 ~ in the General Assembly who feel very strongly to the
1:1
'~"
16 .'z".. contrary, and I work for the General Assembly.
0z
17 ''""
Certainly if there be such a thing, a reasonable
18 property tax is as reasonable as any other reasonable tax.
19 Property taxes have been around an awfully long time, they
20 work well in some regards. I suppose one of the biggest
21 shortcomings of the property tax is that it requires that
22 a value be placed on property, and when it's necessary to
23 place a value on property some judgment must be exercised by
24 someone, however professional he may be, and no one ever
25 agrees on what the value of property might be.
PAGE 23
We don't have this problem with the income tax
2 and a lot of those taxes as to what the value is. The
3 whiskey tax, there's no question about what the value is
4 because you're selling it every day, it's fixed,
5
In the instance of the sales tax, in the instance
6 of the whiskey tax itself, of course. that's fixed per gallon.
7 there is no question about~at the volume is, but such is not
8 the case with property tax. It not only is a difficult thing
9 to arrive at what the value is in a fashion that's satis-
."..~ ~
10 factory to even most parties. let alone all. but it's
"z
11 ia0..=..:..
~Fi @)~12 a: 14 ~ Iut <:rl: 15 ~ "..a: ;;;)
16 z...
.az
17 a<l::
expensive to arrive at what the value is. Of course, speaking of our other taxes. the sales
tax used to be our largest producer, it isn't quite any more, but it's still around third. It's a simple mathematical calculation in the instance of sales tax; such is not the case with property tax.
So granted that it has those shortcomings. the
18 mechanisms are set up as a practical matter for collecting
19 property tax and the people apparently are accustomed to it,
20 so I see nothing wrong with continuing to use it provided
21 it's set At a reasonable level.
22
I pay a fair amount of property taxes every year.
23 Some of them are unreasonable, some of them are very
24 reasonable. it sort of depends on the local government
25 sitU3.tion.
PAGE 24
MS. GREENBERG: Dr. Cal Adamson just came in the
2 room, he's the Associate State School Superintendent.
3
Would you like to respond to this question?
4
MR. ADAMSON: I presume you're on
5
MS. GREENBERG: This is Question 2,
6
MR. HACKNEY: I voted yes for you on Number 1.
7
MR. ADAMSON: Did you vote yes for me? I appreciate
8 that because that was the answer I was going to give, Pete.
9
I'm really not familiar with what's gone on prior
\~,
10
.."z
11 i=
@r~..0".". 12
to my being here, so I thank you for the privilege of coming and I'll try to keep my remarks regarding this brief, I'm probably going to duplicate what somebody has already had to say anyway.
14 >-
Let me say to you that my response to the second
I-
VI
:I:
.15 ~ question is yes, that it should continue to be a primary
":::l
16 .lzD.. source of revenue for local school systems, but I added
..Q
Z 17 lD
"But not the sole source."
I think that's important because
18 as I understand what you were saying when I walked in it
19 can become in some school districts with the need for
20 revenues to operate the school a burden, and, let's face it,
21 most local boards of education have become the black-hatters, 22 they're the bad guys, they're the ones who -- the only source
23 they have to go to to raise revenue is the property tax, 24 and they have not had the opportunity to have other sources
25 of revenue such as county and city commissioners have with
PAGE 25
their local option sales tax or revenue sharing funds
,'."
,~~
2 funneled to them to help offset some of the increased costs
3 and consequently they have taken the brunt of it.
4
But the property tax has some characteristics which
5 are good when used in a proper balance, and I think that word
6 to me is quite important.
7
Generally let me say to you the property tax
8 this may have already been said, but it's a tax that's stable,
9 it doesn't fluctutate a great deal with the rise and fall of
10
CzI 11 j:::
".oQ...
~ 12 ~
~F~14 ! !:;r; 15 ~ CI ";;;) 16 ~... oz 17 :
the economy. To use a school finance term, it's highly
inelastic as compared to the elasticity that is put onto your sales tax. The sales tax varies considerably, and that makes it a quality that is good for the financing of education because local boards of education are faced with some mandates that are becoming even greater as the years go by that they have obligations to carry out a program of
18 education, and if the economy happens to slip in a six-month
19 period and the revenue falls, if they were dependent solely
20 upon a tax such as the sales tax they can't go safely to the
21 school teachers they've got a contract with and say "Well,
22 we're just not going to pay you for the rest of this year,"
23 so that's a problem they have.
24
Another feature that I call the committee's
25 attention to is the fact that compared to other states
PAGE 26
generally -- this is a general statement, but compared to
t."
2 other states the property tax that is paid in Georgia is low
3 when you compare the property tax paid by homeowners, property
4 owners in other states.
5
Generally I would say to you that I think one of
6 the things that I've already mentioned is that boards of
7 education have not been afforded the opportunity to share in
8 revenues from other taxes as have county and city commissions
9 such as the local option sales tax or grants from revenue
10 sharing, and those are beginning to get in trouble, and I
can understand why, but I would say to you yes, in my opinion
the property tax should continue to be a source of revenue
for local school systems, but shouldn't be the sole, there
needs to be a broadening of the base somewhere or another.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Mr. Stevens?
MR, STEVENS: The problem is all of us want to keep
property taxes low and at the same time find funds for
18 education. That forces you to go to another tax. What that
19 tax is and how it may, how much it may be is what's at issue
20 here.
21
There's been a lot of talk about raising a penny
22 sales tax at the state level and earmarking that for
23 education as a secondary source, That would generate S0me
24 J50 to $400 million for local school systems.
25
The problem you run into when you start looking for
PAGE 27
public tax for school systems is distribution of that tax
2 once you collect it. That is where you run amok of
3 accomplishing what you want.
4
I'll give you an example of that. You take maybe
5 a small community like Richmond. You know, where do people
6 in Richmond shop? They shop in Savannah primarily, so if
7 you raise the penny sales tax at the local level, say for
8 example as an alternative source and earmark it for education
9 at the local level then the school kids in Richmond are
10
CzI 11 I-
@;;.'oa".... ! 14 I'" :J: 15 ~ l:J '";;;) 16 .~.. 1:1 Z 17 :
certainly going to receive a windfall from the people in the city of Richmond outside of Savannah, so collection and distribution is a particular problem in the sales tax area.
However a penny statewide comes in to Georgia, to our coffers up here. How do you distribute that? Do you go back to the county and say, do you go back on enrollment, do you go back to the point of collection of the penny? The distribution of a different tax may be a different
18 problem both programmatically and politically than the
19 collection of the tax, so that's an additional point you
20 need to consider.
21
There has also secondly been some discussions of
22 people paying, have families to pay a tuition to help
23 provide additional funds for local school systems, but I 24 think the Governor's position, and I think the legislature
25 too, and maybe even the public is that education should
PAGE 28
remain one hundred percent free to all individua.ls, and the
2 government should provide the cost thereof, so ] would not
3 look personally at tuition or charging. I think education
4 should remain free.
5
I agree with Cal that generalizing, looking at the
6 nation as a whole, that our property taxes in Georgia for
7 education are relatively low. Local school systems, even
8 though there is a great hue and cry every time a change is
9 made, we generally don't collect nearly the funes that they
10 do in other states.
Now, looking at other states, as I mentioned
earlier, as to what tax methods and alternatives they have
around the country, we find that with the exception of oil
and gas severance taxes all the states with the exception of
two more use property tax for local cost or share of
financing of public education that they have control over.
Kentucky has a one percent income tax based on
18 where you work, and the state controls it. It comes to the
19 state, they tend to limit the amount of property tax, so
20 there are some other mechanisms, but the real problem here
21 is even if you said no to this question that it should not
22 be, you know, what~ your alternative. If you select one, 23 the distribution of that back to local school systems is a 24 problem.
25
If you look say twenty years down the road, if you
PAGE 29
want to change this away from one tax. to another I just
~.,:
2 personally don't see much opportunity to get away from it.
3
Now, a second factor is this. Local school systems
4 and local people who have local autonomy of their school
5 systems ought to pay for a great share, pay a great share of
6 the cost of education.
7
If the state were to find some tax. source to
8 finance it one hundred percent, just roll the money down to
9 the school systems, I don't think that would be healthy for
10
"z
11 i=
..'0"....
~~r~ ~12 '" 14 ! I'" :I: 15 ~ ":'>" 16 .zO..l 0z 17 '"Ol
two reasons. One, the state then would start to assume, if we
had a hundred percent money into it, picking up the cost against some alternative source, say the property tax, and the counties would not put any money into it, I think that would hurt the educational system, the state would tend to run it from this level up here. I guess I'll say too that's really the overwhelming thought behind it.
18
It is tough. I do know that our levels of M&O
19 and media, our school system amounts, et cetera, are
20 tremendous, and the only other comment I would like to make
21 on this would be relative to enrichment again.
22
It used to require about 4.5 or five mills in
23 equal required local effort the state mandates the counties
24 put up or the school systems put up. That's now down to two
25 mills based on equalized digest of forty percent, it's down
PAGE 30
rr------------------------.-------------,
to about two mills. Okay.
2
So all we're requiring at the state level for them
3 to raise in the form of property taxes is about CWo mills.
4 That's all the requirement we have.
5
MR. HACKNEY: You mean that's the average statewide.
6 It's less than that in some localities.
7
MR. STEVENS: But the point is they're required to
8 do that. say the state average is two mills. All right.
9 The additional they're putting in is at their own choice;
10
Czl 11 j:
'..o"....
@}2; ! 14 lo-n J: 15 .:l Cl '::"> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
the constitution allows them to go up to twenty mills, local school boards except for the independent ones to go up to twenty mills. Okay. That is done for local students and the state does not require that.
DeKalb County chooses to levy 25 mills for education. another county maybe 18 or 20. It's a local decision. the state doesn't necessarily participate in it . So I think that is relative to the property tax. The state
18 doesn't require all this property tax going into local
19 school systems. it's their own choice locally, and as long as
20 they have a free choice of what to put into education and
21 they choose to put in more, you know. and the people in the
22 county are controlling, supposedly controlling the city
23 fathers and county fathers as to how much property tax
24 they're willing to put into education, then I don't know
25 that, you know, we need to put a no answer on this.
PAGE 31
I think I would remain with the property tax,
2 with a yes answer, particularly with local -- and if were
3 mandating twenty mills in every county it might go the other
4 way, but with the level we're in I think we would go with a
5 yes answer.
6
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Cal, do you know just off the
7 top of your head what is the average local millage levied?
8
MR. ADAMSON: About 13.57, Don. That is from the
9 counties; that does not include the city because the cities
10
"z
11 j:
"o.G."o.
~ 12 ~
~Fi ! 14 ... ':"r 15 01) """;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
are different animals. MR. STEVENS: I have a computer report here on two
of them if you want to Xerox it. It shows the mills, what one mill will raise in each school system, what one mill will raise in each county, and also what the current millage rate is in every county in the state, it shows percentiles and so forth. It is fairly brief and I can give it to your staff, they can Xerox it if they don't already have it.
18
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We would like that, we sure
19 would.
20
MS. GREENBERG: Mr. Stevens, you just spoke of this
21 required local effort. Don't you feel that it's more of an
22 equalizing factor since we were talking about property rich 23 and property poor counties and counties that have power plants 24 -- in essence the ones that are rich can levy a very low 25 property tax as far as required local effort, and the
PAGE 32
difference between whatever two percent and twenty percent, 2 eighteen percent goes into their coffers for thEdr 3 educational services, whereas the poor county hEs to levy a 4 very high property tax in order to get to that lequired local 5 effort?
6
MR. STEVENS: I think you answered your own
7 question. I agree.
8
MR. ADAMSGN: I will to.
9
MR. HACKNEY: It's not unequalizing, it's an
10
..,
z 11 ...
.'o0"....
@;I ! 14 ... '<:"zl: 15 ..:.>, '":) 16 ~... Q
Z <l
17 :
equalizing tax, isn't it? If the required local effort were just based on ability to pay, I'll certainly agree, and I believe you gentlemen will support this, that we -- the impact of the required local effort diminishes each year because it's fixed at a set dollar amount .
MR. ADAMSON: It's frozen. MR. HACKNEY: That's right . To back up just a few years here, when the required
18 local effort was passed in '64 -- wasn't it, Cal?
19
MR. ADAMSON: Right.
20
MR. HACKNEY: That' s right, in '64 -- it began at
21 fifteen percent of the cost of the state program of education
22 was supposed to be generated at the local level, the remaining
23 85 percent to be generated by the state. Now, that's just of
24 the state program, not of the total cost of education you
25 understand -- enrichment as Dr. Adamson likes to say.
PAGE 33
The law at that time provided that the required
2 local effort or the fifteen percent would increase each year
3 by one percent until it reached twenty percent and it was
4 supposed to top out.
5
We had new property, or property revaluation going
6 on throughout the state at the time. We found that some
7 people just with their one percent for one year because of
8 the revaluations that were coming in were actually having
9 their millage virtually doubled in some areas -- inflation
10
"z
11 j:
e ; ioc....r..: ! 14 I'" ::r:: 15 ~ "cr: => 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
obviously figures into this too ... so the General Assembly rose in anger and it first simply slowed it down a little bit to where it would only increase by one-half of one percent per year, and then in 1972 as I recall the thing was locked in at 78 million five hundred -- well, I think the law technically says no more than 78 million 600 thousand, or less than 78 million 500 thousand, the department of education has always split the difference, seventy~five-five.
18
There is no magic to the number, that just happens
19 to be what eighteen and a half percent was costing that
20 particular year, so we froze it at that point, you see.
21
Now, at that time, at the time of its freezing
22 obviously something well in excess of fifteen percent of the
23 cost of the state program of education for that year, but
24 since it' s been frozen it I s diminished now to about ten
25 percent, slightly under for the fiscal year we just began
PAGE 34
last week, so even though it is clearly an equalizing factor 2 j based on, quote, ability to pay, it's equalizing has
3 diminished and will continue to diminish as long as it's
4 frozen, and obviously the cost of the state program is
5 continuing to increase.
6
MR. STEVENS: I veiw that a little differently.
7 The difference between two mills statewide averaged to
8 equalize say twenty mills gives you inequities on --
9 In other words, every mill raised, the wealthy ones can
10 raise~ mill and generally raise more money.
When we froze RE in '72 the RE statewide average
was around 4.9 percent, say five percent, so by virtue of
dropping down to two we've raised the range, the zone in
which equity had existed. I think that's what you were
talking about, wasn't it?
MS. GREENBERG: Exactly.
MR. STEVENS: And that would be my general comment
18
on that.
19
MR. ADAMSON: Let me make a distinction here.
20 Mr. Hackney was using percentages and Clark was using mills,
21 and you can't mix the two together when you talk about the
22 eighteen and a half percent at which time the 78,55 million
23 dollars was frozen, that did not constitute eigteen and a
24 half mills, it constituted something less than five mills,
25 4.9 mills, so you've gone from 4.9 mills down to slightly
PAGE 35
less than two mills, whereas your percentage has decreased
2 from eighteen and a half down to less than ten percent.
3
I just wanted to make that point for clarification
4 because they're apples and or,anges and they don't rightly
5 mix.
6
MR. HACKNEY: Could I add also, please -- you must
7 also bear in ~nd that unfortunately many members of the
8 General Assembly have trouble grasping this particular
9 concept, the required local effort even though as Dr.
10
"z
.11 jco:: 2
@;i 14 ..~.. '" :I: 15 ol) "co: ;;) 16 .~.. zo 17 :
Adamson indicated is frozen in total statewide is not frozen for any district, and it fl~uates each year. There's a new study made each year, the-thing bounces allover the lot, and based ona county's, quote, ability to pay as perfected in the tax digest, end quote, they pay perhaps as much not a 9.7 or 9.8 percent required local effort which is the average statewide, but as little as a couple of percent or as much as -- we've seen it i~ excess of 24 and 25
18 percent, you know, in Atlanta, but that was back right after
19 it was frozen, you know, the thing was still high.
20
But the ability to pay based on taxable wealth is
21 still as present as it ever was, it's just that the total
22 required local effort assumes a diminishing stature each
23 year.
24
MS. GREENBERG: Question 3 relates to a
25 constitutional provisbn, Article VIII, Section VII,
PAGE 36
Paragraph 1, which mandates that the county's fiscal authority
2 shall levy the school tax which is certified to by the county
3 board of education, and Question 3 asks:
4
"Should independent school boards be given the
5 same authority to set the local tax as county school boards?"
6
MR. ADAMSON: I answered yes, because I do not
7 for the life of me I can't really see why one should be
8 treated differently from the other.
9
First of all, you find some various statutes that
10
"z
11 j:
@;;."o~.". ! 14 ... '<:"zl:: 15 .:> "~ ::> 16 .~.. Q Z <l: 17 :
refer to county boards, members of county boards of education, for the life of me I don't see that they should be treated any differently than any member of a city board of education.
I recall one specific that has always bothered me, it says an employee of one board of education cannot serve as a member of another board of education, that board or another board, yet there is no prohibition since the word county is used that prevents a city board member from serving
18 as a member of a county board somewhere. We actually have
19 some of this, and this has always bothered me from an
20 educator's standpoint that we treat the two groups differently
21
MR. HACKNEY: Are you looking at me to respond?
22
I have no particular answer for this question. I
23 see it as something that was put in to begin with by I assume
24 some legislative vote, therefore I wouldn't advocate removing
25 it or anything.
PAGE 37
I can understand Dr. Adamson's feelings on it.
2 Basi.cally I think that sort of thing we agree with, but it's
3 sort of like the question that comes up a little bit about
4 Savannah-Chatham County, should they be mentioned in there?
5
They were mentioned for some reason. I think Dr.
6 Adamson is very familiar with it.
7
MR. ADAMSON: I am. I think the Savannah-Chatham
8 County, if I might address that, at that specific time there
9 was a question as to who would operate the school system,
".;;
10 the city or the county, and they decided they would both have
>:
"Z
11 j:
..I0I..<..
one school system that served both, and that was really the
12 II< first attempt to merge together city and county school
@ ; I systems, so it was mentioned in that particular way.
14 !
We have foll~ed suit now with many cities and
I-
UI
4
:I:
15 ~ counties having merged together, and you in effect treated
"II<
::l
16 .Iz.I.I them differently from the fact that you treat Tifton and Tift
"Z
4
17 II< III
County which used to be in the same category, the 'city and
18 the county system, and now operating as just a county sy'stem,
19 so the school district in Chatham County serves the entire
20 county which is in comparison to the city of Savannah.
21
Really it doesn't make much difference, but I don't
22 see any need for it to be mentioned since we don't mention
23 Bibb and Macon and all the others that have since gone
24 together.
25
MS. GREENBERG: Dr. Adamson is referring to
PAGE 38
Question 5 on page 2 which asks "Should Chatham COtmty and
2 the City of Savannah continue to be specifically referenced
3 in the constitution?", and that also is part of Article VIII,
4 Section VII, Paragraph 1.
5
Mr. Stevens, would you like to respond to the
6 quest:bn?
7
MR. STEVENS: We have got now --
8
THE REPORTER: Mr. Stevens, would you talk a little
9 bit louder, please?
10
'"z
11 j:
@;;o..e..x..: ! 14 ... '<"l J: 15 ~ 'e"x: ~ 16 .~.. Cl Z <l 17 :
MR. STEVENS: We have got about 28 independent school systems now, and I think one of the bigger ones would probably be Atlanta. Most of them are fairly small like Bremen and others, the smaller school systems, and if you really get down to it I don't think it's a big problem either way on this, if you go either way with this.
I do think local governments ought to decide this . I think the bigger issue would be if you get right down to it
18 from a public point of view the school systems probably
19 should be consolidated, there's really no reason to have,
20 you know, an independent school system in the middle of
21 another system. We have more than enough school systems as
22 it is, and it costs the state tremendous amotmts of money to 23 accomplish the scale to have 180-some school syste~, it's
24 very costly, you know, but here that's a local issue, and 25 so many of these local school syste~ probably wou1drlt want
PAGE 39
consolidated, but I'm speaking from a financial point of view,
2 not necessarily from a county rights point of view or
3 anything else. Financially it is very expensive to maintain
4 all these independent, or all these number of school systems.
5
So the real answer I think to Number 3 is financia11~
6 is at least they probably should be consolidated, but as long
7 as they are independent, you know, the city council I guess
8 supposedly in these counties -- these counties come and
9 request funds, they don't set budget, they request funds,
10
Czl 11 I-
o<....t..:
~ 12 ~
~F~14 ! IIII :r 15 ~ Cl <t: :> 16 ~ Q z 17 :::
and the city or county fathers or whomever would then decide on the budget for the independent school system. I don't think that's the case throughout most of them. There's 28 of them, and most of them are fairly small, and I don't have really a big problem with it one way or the other.
MR. HILL: Could I ask another question? This came up last time, and I would like to address it to you.
There is a provision in Section V, Paragraph 7 on
18 page 68 that protects systems established prior to adoption
19 of the constitution of '77.
20
At the last meeting we discussed this, the committee
21 members discussed this question and tentatively decided that 22 was no longer necessary that the systems be specifically 23 protected because they fall within the same requirements and 24 everything else, so now that you are here could you respond 25 to that?
PAGE 40
MR. ADAMSON: I believe that, if I recall correctly,
2 when I was a teenager how this came about, but the
3 constitution of 1945 when it did all the consolidating,
4 and that's when this came into being, that was included so
S as to not specifically require the -- it was a massive
6 consolidation with the constitution of 1945, I think we went
7 in Georgia from about 600 and something school districts
8 down to a little over 200 -- Pete, you may recall the 9 specific figure, I'm a little bit young to remember all that,
10 but I would tell you -- I'm not implying that you're older
but you've been at it longer than I have I think that was
included at that time simply to allow those cities who had
school districts, municipal school districts to continue,
but the prohibition of creating more, I would implore that
that be kept because I think that without it you're going to
have a lot of pressure put on legislators to create more.
MS. GREENBERG: Could one of you explain the
18 distinction between the county's boards are able to just ask
19 for their levy and the city boards have to request it? Is 20 that the primary distinction between the means of financing?
21
MR. ADAMSON: Let me address it, since I was a
22 superintendent of a city school system before coming to the 23 Department of Education, and Clark and Pete may want to add 24 something to this, but I think you have to recognize that 2S municipal or city school systems are creatures of the
PAGE 41
legislature, that's how they come into being, they came into
2 being through an act of the legislature prior to the
3 constitution of 1945 which put the prohibition of the
4 establishment of any more on, and the method of taxation as
5 provided by the act which created a particular municipal
6 school district varies.
7
There are some, which the city of LaGrange school
8 district is an example, where I grew up, the city of LaGrange
9 school system is actually a department of the city government
~:
10 of LaGrange, just like the water department, the streets and
"z
11 i=
..oO..f..:
~ 12 ~
~F~14 ! I'" :r 15 ~ "Of: ;:)
16 .~.. Q Z
17 ::
sewers. On the other hand, the Waycross school district
was created by an act of the legislature, and the Waycross board of education is specifically given the authority in their charter to levy a maximum of up to 22 mills, so there is a wide variation even within the cities; therefore, when you go back to the question that I raised earlier I think
18 you ought to treat the cities and counties all alike and
19 you would standardize ..
20
The other problem that I have with that, in many of
21 the city charters they have to go to the city commission to
22 get their tax revenue, they request it, then the city
23 commission or whatever that form of city government reviews
24 and decides on how much revenue they're going to have, yet
25 the city commission in itself has no authority to call for
PAGE 42
the abolition of the school district if they want to get rid 2 of it.
3
There's only one provision, a couple of provisions,
4 but the real only one that I'm aware of that has ever been
5 used to any effect is that if a city wants to get out of the 6 school business they have to go to the petition route and 7 collect a petition of 25 percent of the registered voters, 8 and then they call an election, so that is another problem 9 that exists within the law.
10
Clark, you may have something to say.
MR. STEVENS: I don't.
MR. HENRY: Do you think by giving them this
authority to set the tax would encourage them to remain in
existence, whereas --
MR. ADAMSON: I think it would encourage them to get
out of it.
MR. HENRY: Oh, it would?
18
MR. ADAMSON: And I'm for Clark, we've got too many
19 school -- if we follow the same line of reasoning as Clark,
20 we have too many small school districts in the state of
21 Georgia. They are not all municipal or city school systems
22 too, incidentally, because actually the smallest school
23 district we have in the state is a county school system.
24
MR. HENRY: I mean whereas right now they have to
25 go to the city government and are subject to an almost line
PAGE 43
item of their budget --
2
MR. ADAMSON: They are.
3
MR. HENRY: -- and whereas the county goes to the
4 county board of conmlissioners or whatever and says "We want
5 this millage rate set in order to raise this much money,
6 this much revenue," so what I'm saying is if you allow the
7 cities to do that, to go and say we want this amount of
8 revenue from this millage rate, would that encourage them to -
9
MR. ADAMSON: I view it quite the opposite, that it
10
"z
e;j.11 I...oIll:
! 14 I':z":
15 ~
"Ill:
;:)
16 ~...
oz 17 :i
would result in the cities making decisions that we do not want rather than -- many times it becomes a political issue within the city.
On the other hand, the provision was made by law that the city could by means other than the petition route ask for a referendum, either the city board of education or the city governing body could ask for a referendum for the voters to decide, and I think the voters must always be given
18 the decision as to whether or not a school system in a city
19 shall exist, continue to exist or be abolished.
20
If that provision were made somewhere, I think it
21 would facilitate in my opinion the elimination of some of the
22 small inefficient uneconomical-to-operate school districts.
23
MS. GREENBERG: Any other questions or comments?
24
Okay. To get your vote, Mr. Hackney, you think on
25 Ques:ion 3, your answer is yes or no?
PAGE 44
._-----------,
MR. HACKNEY: I don't believe I have an answer .
.,
2 I certainly attempted not to have an answer on it, I'm certai
3 of that.
4
MS. GREENBERG: Is that how you stand now I no
5 comment?
6
MR. STEVENS: I don't think he and I either one are
7 going to be able to answer yes or no on this.
8
MR. ADAMSON: I would answer yes. I can unders tand
9 their position.
10
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. We will go on to Question 4.
Czl
11 i=
.'"0".".
"Should a specific millage limitation on property
@ r l12 '" taxes which can be imposed by local boards of education be retained in the constitution?"
14 ! I-
MR. HACKNEY: I feel that it should, but in that
'<"l
:J:
15 ~ same connection I think that it's a thing that should be left
Cl
'~"
... 16 zIII c
up to the local voters as to whether or not -- and you have
Z
<l
'" 17 III another question dealing with that -- whether or not it may
18 be exceeded.
19
And I feel that it's important as long as you have
20 grand juries deciding who's going to be on the board of
21 education. You need people who are responsive to the
22 electorate I believe deciding, unless the electorate decides 23 itself of course as you indicated, deciding whether or not 24 the millage should be fixed at some I dorlt think we should
25 say exorbitant amount but something in eEcess of twenty mills.
PAGE 45
Should it be twenty? I don't know. Maybe it ought
2 to be 22 or maybe 15 or something of the sort, but some sort
3 of a limitation should be placed when you've got nine
4 elected officials deciding what the bUdget is going to be
5 for a given school district for the coming fiscal year in
6 my opinion.
7
MR. HILL: Do you think the twenty mill limitation
8 is as good as -- is satisfactory?
9
MR. HACKNEY: If they said fifteen mills instead of
;,.,
:~,,~
10
CJ Z
11 i=
.'0.".... 12 '"
@rl 14 ! ~ VI :I: 15 o:l
CJ
'":::l 16 Iz..I.I
Q
Z
'" 17 III
twenty I would be trying to build a case for fifteen mills; if they had said 25, I would be trying to build a case for it.
Apparently this is something that has pretty well been reached in most areas and, yes, it would certainly like to see it retained.
There are some areas it's long since gone past twenty mills, and I think it's probably needed to, but it was done by popular vote.
18
MS. GREENBERG: Most school districts or most
19 counties have exceeded this?
20
MR. HACKNEY: No, Ma' am.
21
MR. ADAMSON: No, Ma' am. Only a very few.
22
CHAIRMAN THORNTON: That's what I was going to ask
23 Cal while ago. The average millage rate in the state right
24 now is 13.5.
25
MS. GREENBERG: But under Paragraph 2 have they voted
PAGE 46
to exceed it?
2
MR, ADAMSON: I think there are six of them, Vickie,
3 six as best I recall, there are six school districts in the
4 state to which the twenty mill limitation applies that have
S that authority, Some of them are not exceeding the twenty
6 mills,
7
MR, HENRY: Could I ask one more question I forgot
8 to ask a moment ago?
9
If you give independent school boards the authority
10 to set the local tax, do you foresee that they would only tax
property then, or would they still have various revenues that
they have right now?
MR, ADAMSON: Technically the only schoal districts
that have the authority, the city school systems that have the
authority to tax is an ad valorem tax as provided in their
charter, and I would still be referring to only that ad
valorem taxation authority to be given to the city boards of
18 education,
19
There are some school districts that have n~ city
20 school districts that have no ad valorem taxes because the
21 city has found ways either through revenue sharing, power
22 generation, utilities not to have to levy a tax, and that's
23 fine, That still would not necessitate any property tax levy
24 if the city chose to about it that way, but the authority
2S would still be there,
.~
PAGE 47
CHAIRMAN THORNHILl.: Mr. Stevens, would you like to
2 address the Question Number 41
3
MR. STEVENS: Yes. Currently the twenty mill limit
4 can be exceeded by local constitutional amendment. We have,
5 like Cal says, several of those, and I think some of the
6 counties, mainly DeKalb right now is around 25 mills as I
7 remember.
8
You might want to consider on this issue a stage
9 and I agree we need a limitation because of the political
10 CzI
11 j:
@;;..'o"....
makeup of the boards, but you might want to cons ider a different approach to the limitation.
One thing we've look at for quite some time just out of interest would be a schematic system that might work
14 ~I something like this, to set a required local effort at ." -c(
%
15 ~ between two and five mills on a statewide average, let's say CI :'>"
16 ~ two mills for example, and then come back and allow the school Q
Z
-c(
17 : boards to carry that up an additional ten mills on their own
18 authority.
19
This would be limiting the school boards' authority
20 to raise taxes at the local level, you understand, because
21 they can go twenty as it is now, so to limit that at ten 22 and let's say go up to another fifteen mills by local 23 referendum, that is, let the people decide in the community 24 if they want to eventually spend more for education up to 25 another fifteen mills. That would all total up to around
PAGE 48
, , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _..._ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
27 mills. There's no magic to this, it's just schematic,
"." I:'
2 it's just an example that you can go varying degrees of it.
3
But in setting -- if you decide to recommend and
4 set the millage, you don't necessarily have to stay at 20,
5 period, and leave the authority to local boards and then go
6 the constitutional amendment, local constitutional amendment
7 to go higher.
8
There are other ways to approach it. You might want
9
c.;,
,:',
10
z~
11 j: I:< 0.Q...
.~r~ @~ 12 I:< 14 !
l-
V>
~:z:
15 .:>
~
16
...I:<
~
.z..
Q
Z <i(
17 .I.:<.
to consider them. This is just one example. MR.. ADAMSON: If I may -MR. STEVENS: Don't use my numbers now. MR. ADAMSON: I just want to caution that I have
personally seen in this type of arrangement, if I understood you correctly, was a millage to be voted on annually by the electorate, that fifteen mills, where you say that fifteen mills could be determined by the electorate that it remains there permanently. That bothers me if it's one in which
18 you're going to have to go to the electorate, the board every
;:'
19 year if they need to levy that, because the experience of
20 most states have had that have this has been disasterous.
21
All you have to do is look at Cleveland, the midwest
22 where this is common, and the school systems can get chaos
23 simply because the voters become disenchanted with the members
24 of the board of education, there are occasions on record where
25 voters have simply voted down millage levies simply because
PAGE 49
they didn't like a member of the board of education, and that
2 becomes a real problem for me.
3
MR. STEVENS: There are other ways people were
4 talking about. You could say set the minimum by local school
5 boards at twenty, but authorize up to another ten or fifteen
6 mills by local referendum rather than having to go the
7 constitutional amendment route.
8
I'm just saying, you know, I'm not -- I agree with
.9 Cal, there's probably problems anywhere you go with this, the
10 twenty mills, there's all kinds of problems that will turn
"z
11 j:
@;I'"o.".".
on this issue, but we're just saying that in essence there are other ways that you can look at this to set up a schematic in the constitution depending upon what you feel about the
! 14 I-
limitations for local financing by property tax.
OIl
%
15 .:l
I don't really have a recommendation for it. I
"'";:)
16 ~... wouldn't necessarily recommend this or any other .
Q
Z
17 =
MR. ADAMSON: Vickie, I said no, but I must -- in
18 saying no I agree with the statement that Pete made earlier
19 and I've been opposed to this all along, so what I'm about to
20 say, and anybody familiar with my dissertation would
21 recognize that I do not believe that boards of education
22 which set policy and at the same time make such decisions
23 as millage levies ought not to be responsive to the public. 24 That's a firm belief I've had for many, many years and I 25 continue to maintain it.
PAGE 50
If we could get that, then I feel there should be
2 no cap on the millage because the electorate would have the
3 con~rol of the board of education, and we're gradually moving
4 towards this, it's just taking such a slow process to do it.
5
The number of elected boards that answer to the
6 voters has increased over the past few years, but it's ever
7 so slowly.
8
I wish some way we could wave a magic wand and
9 boards of education would be responsive to the public, and
;..
",
10
"z
11 i=
'o.."....
@;j
,
! 14
t;;
:J:
15 ~
"'";;;)
16 .~..
.'Q
Z
17 :;
they could hire a superintendent as an executive officer to do the job, and if he doesn't do it, kick him out and get somebody who will.
MS. GREENBERG: So would your response then be different if the boards in the counties were elected rather than appointed by the grand jury?
MR. HACKNEY: Mine would be yes . MR. ADAMSON: Mine would be different from a yes to
18 a no.
19
MS. GREENBERG: Do you have th~ statistics on which
20 counties or districts have amended this portion of the
21 constitution?
22
MR. ADAMSON: I can give you d~ta on that. I'll
23 provide you with a copy of it. I collect it every year.
24 I don't have it with me, but I do have it in my office.
25
MS. GREENBERG: Then I have another question with
PAGE 51
Question 3 which deals with the authority to set the local
,';:
2 tax.
3
Apparently in school districts with appointed boards
4 the district, the appointed county board can set the millage
5 rate, and that's dangerous and that's why we need the ceiling?
6
MR. ADAMSON: That
7
MR. HACKNEY: They don't set the millage rate, they
8 set the budget, and then it's left up to the county
9 commissioners I believe to raise the --
10
CzI 11 i=
..0~....
12 ~
@rl
14 !...
'~:"z: 15 ~
CI
~ ;;;)
16 .'z"..
0z
~
17
~
'"
MR. ADAMSON: I think you'll find that in the Newton County case they actually can set the millage.
MR. HACKNEY: Oh, they can? The bottom line is the same, though, MS. GREENBERG: Would you recommend -MR. HACKNEY: The digest is so and so, then they set the budget that has the effect of setting it. MR .. ADAMSON: But if the digest is changed, the
18 board can still maintain the same millage that they've set
19 even though they've changed their number of dollars, It's
20 a complex problem.
21
Now, what was the question?
22
MS. GREENBERG: Possibly would you recommend then
23 deleting from Article VIII, Section VII~ Paragraph 1, the 24 provision which allows the boards of education the authority
25 to levy without going to the local government?
PAGE 52
MR. ADAMSON: No, I would not recommend that,
2
MS. GREENBERG: Since apparently we're worried about
3 responsiveness to the people?
4
MR. ADAMSON: Right. That's right, responsiveness
5 to the people.
6
Still if you don't do it that way you've got to
7 turn around and go through some other political body --
8
MS, GREENBERG: Which would be responsive possibly
9 by being elected.
10
MR. ADAMSON: That hasn't worked either. I think
you've got to have a board of education that has the duty and
responsibility to tax for education, but that responsibility
must be answerable to the public to me by them being elected
by the public and put into that position. That's just where
I come from, and, you know, that's part of the democratic
process which I still have a great deal of faith in,
MRS. COOK: I'm just going to mention the fact once
18 ~gain for about the umteenth time that there is a serious
19 problem in some counties, particularly Bibb, where an elected
20 board submits a budget to an elected county commission, and
21 which annually has a big hassle with that board of county
22 commissioners simply because the county commisSon does not
23 accept that budget and will cut it every time, and the board 24 has no authority, we have a pre-1877 charter.
25
MR. ADAMSON: That has always bothered me too
PAGE 53
because I've found as a practical matter that the school
2 districts that the charter predates the 1877 constitution,
3 they use this as a rule to get by some things they don't want
4 to live with, and then if it suits their convenience they'll
5 say this is the law.
6
MRS. COOK: That's what I,lm concerned about, any
7 statement of support for Paragraph 7 which was read"by Vickie
8 that school systems established prior to the adoption of the
9 constitution of 1877 shall not be affected by this
10 consitution.
This, of course, contradicts any other statement
that all school systems should be treated alike, because it
certainly does not create that kind of equality among school
sytems.by the constitution.
MR. ADAMSON: I personally favor the elimination of
it, but I don't know how it could be eliminated.
MR. STEVENS: It goes back to what we were
18 originally talking about, they probably ought to be
19 consolidated. The example you gave there --
20
MRS. COOK: We have a Bibb County board of education
21 that includes city and county schools, so we already have that
22 kind of situation. There is no -- there is only one system
23 in Macon and Bibb County, and it's governed by the Bibb
24 County Board of Education, they're all elected officials.
25
MR. GREENE: Your problem comes into the
1
PAGE 54
constitution which the 1877 --
2
MRS. COOK: That's the protection that the
3 commissioners have. We took them to court, I've told this
4 committee
5
MR. ADAMSON: It's a very serious matter. The only
6 way to do it is to change the constitution, to be honest about 7 it.
8
MR. HILL: The committee tentatively agreed last
9
,.,.1
-;.
10
"z
11 l-
@;;.I:< o 0.
! 14 I'<"l %
15 .:>
"I:<
.:;)
16 ~
Q
Z
17 g<l
time to eliminate that provision. MRS. COOK: That's what I'm trying to make sure,
we're still supporting that elimination. I wasn't too sure. I heard that turned around this time, and I wanted to make sure.
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. Let's-MR. HILL: Let me ~ring the other members up to date on what we have been considering in the other section in terms of how the local boards will be made up.
18
The proposal would be that the local boards would
19 continue to be elected or appointed as they are at the
20 effective date of the constitution, and thereafter they can
21 be changed by local act subject to referendum, so I don't
22 know that there will be
There will not be any change on
23 the effective date of this consitution on the makeup of the
24 local boards, so we'll still have some appointed and some
-.
25 elected under the way it's gone so far, so under that
PAGE 55
----------- --------------,
circumstance you probably would still say yes that the
2 limitation should be retained, since we don't have elected
3 officials in every county we don't have that accountability
4 so that we would probably under the present thinking of the
5 committee still retain that limitation, the millage
6 limitation.
7
So I think you're agreeing with the millage limita-
8 tion under the present circumstances should probably be there,
9 but perhaps a different method of changing it could be
10 CzJ
11 i=
@;;o"......
provided for in the constitution so it would not necessitate a local amendment every -time you wanted to do it.
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. Question 5, "Should Chatham County and the City of Savannah continue to be specifically
14 ~I referenced in the constitution?"
'z"
15 .:l
That is under Article VIII, Section VII, Paragraph 1
CJ
"::>
16 ~...
MR.. ADAMSON: I say no .
Q
Z
17 :
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Mr. Hackney, Mr. Stevens?
18
MR.. HACKNEY: If it suits Chatham and Savannah not
19 to be specifically referenced, then I think it would be fine.
20 I don't think anybody else cares, really.
21
MR. STEVENS: I don't think it needs to be
22 necessarily separately referenced either.
23
MS. GREENBERG: Question 6, "Should the present
24 method oi removing or increasing the local millage limitation
25 be retained in the constitution?"
PAGE 56
That is Article VIII, Section VII, Paragraph 2.
2
MR. STEVENS: We have already covered that I think.
3
MR. ADAMSON: I said yes. If you're going to keep
4 the millage limitation, then there should be some provision
5 for a local school district who desires to do more than this
6 to be able to solve that problem.
7
MR. HILL: Yes, but it may be modified, so long as
8 some procedure is set forth in the constitution to allow --
9
MR. ADAMSON: As long as some procedure is provided
10
zCl 11 I-
.'o.".".
@;j 14 ~ I'<"t ::t 15 ~ Cl :'>" 16 .~.. zQ 17 ~
for them to do more than that in that system. MS. GREENBERG: Number 7, "In those school systems
containing a power plant, the tax wealth per pupil is typically far in excess of neighboring school systems. Should an attempt be made to equalize the disparity created by this situation?"
MR. HACKNEY: An attempt is made through the required local effort, and as you know the required local
18 effort per child and average daily attendance, for example,
19 Richmond county which is the richest, so the only problem
20 here is the fact that the required local effort as mentioned
21 earlier is diminishing in impact all the time.
22
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Mr. Adamson?
23
MR. ADAMSON: I said yes, there should be some
24 equalization.
25
One of the things that we have looked at is what
PAGE 57
would happen if we pulled out all of the utilities, the power
..
2 plants, what happens to the disparity that exists, and I
,"!;
3 would hope that this committee or some committee looking at
4 this would look at the possibility of utilities taxes being
5 done by the state. The disparity in the revenue per child
6 just shrinks up enormously when you do that, number one.
7
Number two, then, the disparity can further be
8 reduced if the present provision for district power equaliza-
9 tion or some other form of equalizadon were adopted and
.,i.;
10
\:I Z
11 j:
..0~....
12 ~
@;I
14 .~..
'~"
:I:
15 ~
\:I
~ ::)
16 .zC.D.
Q
Z
~
17
~
CD
funded in the state. Then that begins to get down to the bottom line that
Pete has talked about, about your required local effort, then the required local effort is two mills or five mills or less than ten percent or eighteen and a half percent, it doesn't assume the proportion that it does now.
MR. HACKNEY: It's a popular belief among many members of the General Assembly that in the case of -- I
18 mean that all of us allover the state are paying part of
19 their required local effort due to the location of the power
20 plant there, and to some degree that's true.
21
MR. ADAMSON: And to some degree that's true.
22
MS. GREENBERG: So could you foresee some sort of
23 tax from those power plants going to a state fund and being
24 disbursed statewide?
25
MR. ADAMSON: I'm not sure how, and again you get to
PAGE 58
the distribution question that Clark mentioned earlier about
2 the sales tax, how do you distribute, it becomes a po1tica1
3 question itself, but just the fact that the utilities were
4 removed from property taxation at the local level and put
5 at the state level, the disparity in revenue per child that's
6 generated diminishes greatly, and that's a political question
7 that those counties -- boy, they'll fight you tDthe nth degree
8 for that.
9
MS. GREENBERG: All right. Any--
10
"z
11 i=
'o."".".
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 lV> :z: 15 ..:.., '";;;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 :
MR. STEVENS: The power plant problem, I'll give you
to magnify, shows that Heard County really has got four or
five big ones, I guess, but in Heard county one mill raises
$143 per child, and you go then to the poorest county which is Jefferson, on~ mill raises $11 as opposed to $143, so you
,
see that there is a great opportunity there for enrichment in
Heard based on the tax base. This has changed dramatically
in the last years.
18
If you want to look at the dollars per student
19 produced by one mill levy against equalized digest, the
20 median -- the median, that's the most common number in 1970-
21 '71 was $13.93. It has now risen last year in an eight or
22 nins~year period from $13.93 to $35.90 per student per one
23 mill levy.
24
The growth in the state is absolutely phenomina1,
25 and that's 157 percent increase in eight years enrichment in
PAGE 59
eight years as opposed to others what a one mill levy would
"...
2 raise, and it goes back to that initial question we had
3 earlier. It's probably the toughest issue you have to
4 struggle with in this committee as to the equalization issue.
5
Now, even at the ninety percentile which would be
6 say Ben Hill, let's take out "the power plants, you're looking
7 at about 58 or $59 per student as opposed to ten or eleven.
8
The power plants really kick it about in about four
8r 9
five couties up there, Heard, Webster, Appling is about
10 $101, those counties there, but the equalization issue and
"z
11 I-
'0.l>"...
the disparity in that issue alone is becoming phenominal.
12 '"
@)r l
Let's see, I had a few more points on that. There are all kinds of ways to approach it. To me
14 ~ I-
the required local effort, the $78 million or so is not such
':"r
15 ~ a big fact01in our overall scheme of things, thjPverall cost ":'":l
16 lz.D.. of education to the state or local counties, but this "
0z
17 '"lD disparity between even the ninety percentile and the bottom
18 is I think a grave problem, and I think the state is subject
19 to, you know, the courts and other problems associated with
20 it down the road, particularly with the disparity continuing
21 to grow wider and wider.
22
MR. HENRY: I have a cQuple of questions. Were you
23 through?
24
MR. STEVENS: Yes.
25
, MR. HENRY: I'm sorry. I hat~o keep harping on
PAGE 60
this, the power equalization. Would that raise our per studen
2 outlay where we're now 51st in the country up to an adequate
3 level or a level which the state could be proud of?
4
And the second question is, if we did have a power
5 plant property taxes returned to the state, would that be
6 adequate to fund the district power equalization?
7
MR. STEVENS: No.
8
MR. HACKNEY: It would raise undoubtedly the amount
9 spent because it would provide an incentive to raise taxes.
.,
lD
11 .Cz-l
0.'"".". 12 '"
@rl 14 .~:'"r 15 ~ Cl '"::) 16 .az..l Q ..Z 17 '"
Whether it would raise it to adequate or not -MR. STEVENS: And there's not really a correlation
to DPE and the expenditure per child. MR. ADAMSON: All DPE does is guarantee to a local
school system: that they have the ability to raise per child the same amount of money as their neighbor at the ninety percentile. That's in reality what it is.
MR. STEVENS: It would put more money in, assuming
18 the counties --
19
MR. HENRY: It would reduce the tax burden on the
20 people in those counties to the extent that the state made a
21 payment to that county.
22
MR. STEVENS: Let me say this to you. If you're
23 in Jefferson County and you raise one mill the local people
24 give you $11 in property taxes and the state gives you the
25 ninety percentile, the $35, the likelihood in Jefferson
PAGE 61
County is to do what they properly ought to do in Jefferson
~~~
2 County, that is to put more money into public education,
3 but that would tend, like Mr. Hackney says, to raise that $11
4 at the county level per mill and say they had this windfall
5 from the state and they're likely to jump five, ten mills to
6 get this huge influx of state money, and it~ a small cost
7 to them, but you know the counties are spending two, three,
8 four mills currently on education.
9
I don't know whether or not, particularly where the
10 tax digest is low, I don't know what they do for education
z~ 11 j:
in those counties, frankly.
..0"....
12 "
THE REPORTER: I'm going to have to remind everybody
@ r l to speak up, please. I've got to hear)Ou and make a record
! 14 of this.
l-
UI
::t
15 01)
MR. HACKNEY: I certainly agree with what Mr.
~
";;;) 16 .'z.". Steven:s is saying there. I know in the normal appropriations
Q
Z
17 "'"
process the surest way to get something funded is to show the
18 federal government is going to put in at least fifty percent
19 of the cost. That almost insures you're going to get your
20 local money.
21
MR. STEVENS: It would tend to raise the local
22 expenditure of the state.
23
MR. ADAMSON: It would have that tendency.
24
MR. STEVENS: To put more money into education, so
25 programmatically the tax question is whether or not the locals
PAGE 62
want to pay more taxes, so it's a different issue. It's
2 difficult. Money is important.
3
MR. ADAMSON: In the event of the District Power
4 Equalization being funded, I think it's imperative there be
5 some cap by which equalization could take place. Otherwise,
6 as Clark has said here, some of the scmol systems will just
7 go, you know, the whole gamut because they can see a wind-
8 fall from the state, and you could control that by a cap as
9 the number of mills that a system raised would be equalized,
"~'
10
"
I!I Z
11 I-
'0...".... 12 '"
@rl
14 ! I':"z:
15 o!I
I!I
'"::;) ... 16 zIII
Q
Z
17 '"III
you still have the authority to raise on up to the constitutional limitation of twenty, but above say fifteen there is no equalization to go with it, and this is just one of the ways in which the whole process of equalization can be implemented.
MR. HENRY: It would facilitate raising the state's per pupil expenditures to at least an acceptable level as compared to the United States.
18
MR. ADAMSON: It would facilitate that. it would
19 not guarantee it, but I think it would result in the per
20 pupil expenditure being increased.
21
MR. STEVENS: You could equalize this ninety
22 percentile, it would cost you 300 million, put it at 75
23 million, equalize it at a lower percentile, you could phase
24 in a program through the years as the budget permits. You
25 know, the exact formula for equal distribution and so forth,
..~
PAGE 63
I don't think anybody is necessarily wed to that, but there
2 are many different ways that you could
I think it ought
3 to be under the statute that you could look at through the
4 years to embark on a program to more nearly equalize
5 education.
6
You certainly couldn't go to the power plant level
7 which would be a hundred percentile, to raise $143. You
8 could go a lower percentile, but even DeKalb County's level,
9 if we eliminate that, would probably be too high statewide.
10 A lower percentile would probably work, or some sort of
I:l
Z
e ; ;11
~
o.'C".I..
mechanism, but here again it's expensive.
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. Thank you",
Question 8, "Should the state be required by the
14 ; constitution to finance special schools (schools for vocationa,
f-
':"z:
15 .l) tech, adult education, exceptional children)?"
I:l
:':">
16 ~
This is reference to Article VIII, Section IX,
Q
z
17 : Special Schools.
18
MR. ADAMSON: I answered yes.
19
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Next question.
20
MR. HACKNEY: I answered no on the grounds that the
21 constitution doesn't need to be -- This is something we're
22 doing at the present time, it seems to be pretty firmly
23 established in practice as well as statute. I assume you're
24 talking about things like area vo-tech schools and so forth.
25 There seems to be more than enough impetus behind these
PAGE 64
programs at the present time to ensure their continuation, 2 I don't see any way for the state to cease doing what it's
3 doing in these areas, constitutional provision or no 4 constitutional provision,
5
MR. STEVENS: I agree with Pete on that. I think
6 I would answer that definitely no, particularly the word
7 required in there. If you want to just put something in
8 saying mayor should, just what we're doing now, but we do
9 need statutory authority to deal with this because before
,~,
10
zCl
11 I-
'0..".... 12 '"
@rl 14 ~ I'x" 15 ~
Cl
'";;;) 16 .lzD..
Q
Z
17 '"lD
94.142 came along at the federal level the kids were into some of these special schools, and this law, we have tended to try to mainstream back in the school system some of these
\
kids. We don't need the constitution to bind us in
regard to these special school areas, we need statutory flexibility to deal with this problem, so I would answer Number 8 if you have the word required in there similar to
18 Mr. Hackney, no.
19
MS. GREENBERG: How are they presently financed?
20 How are special schools financed presently?
21
MR.. ADAMSON: The Atlanta Area School for the
22 Deaf, the School for the Deaf at Cave Springs, the Cabinet 23 for the Blind at Macon are financed through budget appropria24 tion for the state board of education and are actually
25 operated by the state board of education.
PAGE 65
MR. .sTEVENS: The state puts up direct money for
~;.~
2 those.
>.~
3
MR. GREENE: At this point they're under statutory
4 authority; is that what you're saying?
5
MR.. STEVENS: Yes.
6
MS. GREENBERG: Are some local school systems also
7 financing vocational tech schools and other special schools,
8 or it's strictly state funded?
9
MR.. ADAMSON: There are five special schools that
10
"z
11 j:
....II:
0
~r~ @ ~ 12 II:
! 14 ... '-"c :I: 15 .:.
l:I II:
.::>
16 zlD
Q
-Zc
17 II: lD
are operated by the state, the three that I named plus North and South Georgia Area Vocational Technical Schools which are residential type schools~
Then in additton to that we have 26 area vocational technical schools that are operated either through local boards of education such as the Bibb County one or area boards where the counties have gone, or school districts have gone together to provide the service.
18
Now, again, primarily the funding of it comes from
19 the state, although in some instances a local board or area
20 board or county commission may put additional money into it,
21 and I did not address that issue when I said yes, the state
22 should operate -- I meant the state should operate these
23 special schools that now exist, for instance for providing
24 for handicapped children or vocational, specialty vocational
25 programs on a residential basis, the state should still
PAGE 66
operate those .
.,
}
2
MR. STEVENS: What we're saying I guess in summary
3 is that we don't see any change needed.
4
MS. GREENBERG: Also the second part of that
5 question, "Should local boards of education be required to
6 finance such schools?"
7
MR. ADAMSON: For the ones that exist I would say
8 the local boards should not be required to,
9
,
~..'
10
I.!l Z
11 Icr-:
0......
12 cr:
@;I 14 ! ol -n -:<rl 15 .:I
Ic.r!:l
;:)
16 ...zIII Q Z
17 c-<r:l III
MR. STEVENS: Well, to give examples here, you know, area vo-tech schools, we've got seven area vo-tech schools we put money in. I don't know what's special schools; you've got to define what you're talking about.
Now, you go to the second part of the question 8 there and you say area vo-tech, if you want to call that a special school, you know, the question there should the state finance area vo-tech schools --
MR, HACKNEY: Some we almost do, and some we don't
18 really get close to the almost, do we?
19
MR. ADAMSON: We've got a wide variation, Pete.
20
MS. GREENBERG: Then possibly~ should reorganize
21 the constitution under this section called special schools
22 and separate the various types of schools it covers, because
23 it covers vocational training schools, schools for
24 exceptional children, schools for adult education --
25
MR, STEVENS: The only thing you can say there is
PAGE 67
just say the state is authorized to provide for all or part
2 of funding or something and you would be covering that I
3 think.
4
MRS. COOK: If we use that kind of language, would
5 that guarantee that this area of concern could possibly be
6 neglected? I'm particularly concerned about the exceptional
7 children because I would like to consider that issue
8 separately maybe from vocational tech or adult education
9 because many so-called exceptional children are of the age
10 which should be included in any funding for educational
.~.
..,
z
11 j:
"0.0."-.
purposes, that is they're not capable of being mainstreamed
@@F~ ~12 ""
or attending what we call regular educational programs. Are we going to allow the constitution to provide
! 14 ... an out as far as supporting an educational program for
'-"e
%
15 ..:.l, exceptional children?
"";:)
16 .zC.D.
MR. STEVENS: We have to -- the federal government
Q
Z-e
17 "C"D requires -~ not all kids can be mainstreamed. We've got to
18 have flexibility to go both ways.
19
MRS. COOK: I'm not talking about that. The fact
20 that they cannot be mainstreamed does not say that they can't
21 be educated in some way. I mean there is an education that
22 can be provided for -- we're not talking about education as
23 being simply academic, you know, but we're talking about
24
If we're going to get philosophical here about what
25 education is, there are exceptional children who do have
PAGE 68
some potential that can be developed, and I wondered if we
2 are just allowing the constitution not to consider the rights
3 of these people to an education.
4
MR. STEVENS: That already does.
5
MRS. COOK: That's my question. If we do not
6 mandate it, is there still some provision that would not allow
7 these people to be neglected a5 far as educational oppor-
8 tunities are concerned?
9
MR. ADAMSON: Let me see if I can put this in anothe
10
Czl 11 j:
.""o."'.
@;~ 14 ~ ~ '-"<l % 15 ~ Cl "':;) 16 ~... Q Z -<l 17 :
perspective. You're talking about Section IX, aren't you,
Vickie, Section IX, Paragraph I? MS. GREENBERG: Right . MR. ADAMSON: In reality all this does is,give the
authority to two or more political subdivisions who have a need to operate an area school and to provide taxation for it to establish it by popular vote, and let's assume that two
18 small, or more small school districts have a need to provide
19 a service for exceptional children that they can't do
20 themselves, this would make it permissible for them to
21 establish by referendum a special school to carry out that
22 and to tax for it, and in my opinion this section should just
23 be retained as it is.
24
MS, GREENBERG: Without the section the authority
25 lies with the state to provide an education for exceptional
PAGE 69
children or funding, or this section allows the local system
2 to establish that and get funding from the state? In
3 essence the same thing?
4
MR. ADAMSON: I don't see the conflict.
5
MS. GREENBERG: That's what I'm asking, is there a
6 need for this?
7
MR. ADAMSON: Yes, there is a need for this.
8
MRS. COOK: I would just like again, I don't know
9 why Bibb County comes up as an example for some special
10
CzI 11 ...
0<
o
ll.
w
9;1 14 !... ':"r 15 .:> CI 0< ;;) 16 ~ w Q Z 17 :
problems, but it has again in this case related to the question should local boards of education be required to finance such schools, and there is a situation involving the Bibb County Board of Education now in which during last year the board was required after having been sued by parents of an exceptional child to pay for the education of that child in an Eastern private school simply because the county system did not, could not provide the proper facilities or
18 personnel to deal with this child's educational needs, and
19 the parents won the case.
20
They have sued a second time for not nine months of
21 care, but twelve months, and this would include also the 22 expenses incurred bythe parents in visting the child. Now, 23 that's still pending I understand. I don't know how that is 24 developing, but that is a situation, but the fact that Bibb
25 County had to spend, what was it, $20,000, I don't remember
PAGE 70
exactly, for that child's education, it makes this a very
" ,~
'(1
f~
2 important issue I -think.
3
MR. ADAMSON: I don't think that issue is going to
4 go away, but what I see here is that if Bibb County chose
5 to establish along with other counties under this section
6 of the constitution a school to serve this particular child
7 that you could always have a court question as to whether or
8 not this is the most appropriate education, and you're still
9 not going to get away from that, but again I say to you this
10
Czl 11 i=
..'0"..
~ri @~ 12 '" 14 ! IOIl <l :J: 15 .: Cl .'::"> 16 zCD Q Z <l '" 17 CD
affords boards of education an opportunity to by referendum, and that's with voter approval, decide this is the way we're going to attack our problem. Whether or not the court would agree with the county that this is the appropriate way to do it or if the parent could challenge it, that's a whole other question .
MRS. COOK: You're not going to have any court cases by mandating it.
18
MR. STEVENS: This question has really got two
19 issues with it. That is, you're raising the issue of whether
20 or not somebody should provide assistance to that
21 exceptional child; the answer is the federal law requires
22 that.
23
The second question that's really raised by this is
24 who finances it, the state or local government. Right now
25 local governments in the case you mentioned would be
PAGE 71
required to finance this special case. We only finance
.~)
2 special large institutions like for the deaf, for the blind,
3 et cetera, the state really hasn't attempted to -- although
4 we've put some grant money into like TMRs, training for
r
5 mentally retarded, we also provide a great deal of education
6 for Department of Human Resources for MR/MH kids, so you've
7 got a program issue should they be 'served, and the federal
8 government requires that.
9
And then who finances it, right now it's local,
10
"z
11 j:
0/..I..I..:
12 /II:
@rl 14 .~.. ':"r 15 ol) "/II: ;;;) ... 16 zIII Q Z 17 /II: III
and this question says should the locals continue to have to finance it or should the state do it.
I don't think we've put much money into special separate local schools.
MR. ADAMSON: We don't . I think really the second part of this question should be deleted. In answer to the first question, yes, the state
18 should provide for those five schools that exist and should
19 finance them; then if local school districts want to go
20 together under this article of the constitution and provide
21 area schools, then in so doing they provide the finan.cing
22 and it's inherent that when they set it up that they determine
23 how the financing is going to be, each of them contributing 24 whatever provisions that they vote on to do so.
25
MRS. COOK: How do training centers for mentally
PAGE 72
disabled children fall into this? I mean is there considera-
2 tion inherent here for those facilities, because I do know
3 in my experience with such centers discrepancies in
4 programming, staffing, this kind of thing -- support.
5
MR. ADAMSON: Training centers that are operated
6 jointly by school districts are dependent upon the contribu-
7 tion of the local school system under the contract power of
8 systems to contract together for services, and they do vary,
9 but the TMR centers as Clark said do receive some basic
10
Czl 11 j:
@;;oO....l..: ! 14 lo-n J: 15 .:> Cl Ol: ;) 16 ~... oz 17 :
support in the appropriations act every year, of which the state does provide some support for the TMR centers.
We have a psycho-ed center network throughout the state,the state board has set up twenty of those.
MS. GREENBERG: To summarize Question 8, then, you are all in agreement that yes, they should?
MR. ADAMSON: For the five that exist now, MR. STEVENS: I don't see a need for a change,
18 really.
19
MS. GREENBERG: Two more questions, then we're
20 finished.
21
Question 9, "Should two or more boards of education
22 be able to contract with each other for shared facilities,
23 under Article VIII, Section V, Paragraph IV, and maintain
24 shared administrative authority, rather than singular
25 authority in one board?"
PAGE 73
MR. ADAMSON: My initial answer to that is yes,
2 and yet there may be some constitutional question about the
3 creation of additional school districts, and I'm not sure
4 that they're recognized.
5
One of the things that we find in trying to get
6 boards of education to contract together for facilities,
7 and we now have five area high schools serving multischool
8 districts, this is one of the hardest difficulties we have
9 to overcome in getting together is that whichever system is
10
l:l Z
11 i=
...o<>=
lL
@;~ 14 ~ I':<"rl 15 .:> l:l <>= ;:) 16 .~.. o Z <l 17 :::
sending its students to the other one has no legal authority, and I would -- my answer is yes, they need to be some provision for that because I think if it did we would begin to move
MR. srEVENS: -- another step closer into getting some of those small schools to begin to -- that's another step in the consolidation process .
MS. GREENBERG: I know there's a Supreme Court
18 decision which apparently decided the authority is one board
19 rather than a j oint board, but is there any way we could
20 change the language of Paragraph IV to clarify it that there
21 would be joint authority?
22
It's a matter of the Supreme Court's interpretation
23 of Paragraph IV I imagine that came to this conclusion that 24 authority is only in one board. That's Section V, Paragraph
25 IV on page 67 of the constitution.
PAGE 74
MR. STEVENS: I'll tell you one thing you might want to look at is take like Marion County, Schley County,
Webster County situation where they've put a comp high school together, it's in Marion County I think, and that school board
there is running that, and the people that send their kids to school from Schley and Webster have no say-so whatsoever
in the school their kids are going to, so if you want to cure that I think you ought to -- I think it ought to be cured -- you could make provision in these cases for at least
a board be set up with taxing authority, but it be composed of members of the board in the other counties with equal representation based on kids or whatever other factor you
want to use, but I really think that just from an equity
point of view there needs to be some kind of board setup composed of other board members, not a separate new board, but a, you know, of different people, but a composite made
up of other board membrs in those counties, a joint board be 18 set up in these cases. I think that's only fair and
19 equitable for the taxpayers, the kids in the various counties.
20
I'll agree with Cal on that, you have an oppor-
21 tunity here to make a good change. How it would be written
22 I don I t know.
23
MR. HACKNEY: I see no problem with authorizing
24 such a thing as long as it's left optional with the
25 participating citizens. If they felt it was the thing to
PAGE 75
do to let one system do it, fine, let them do it. If they
2 wanted to have some sort of shared administration, that's
3 fine too.
4
MS. GREENBERG: So whichever authority, whether
5 it's joint or
6
MR. HACKNEY: ~ right.
7
MS. GREENBERG: Any further connnent on Question 9?
8
Okay. Our last question. 10. "Should the
9 constitution specifically provide for the manner in which
10
Czl 11 ~
.'oa"....
@;I 14 ~ ~ '-"e :I: 15 .:l Cl '":;) 16 .~.. Q -Ze 17 ::;
equal educational opportunity for the citizens shall be realized?"
MR. ADAMSON: I said no. I said the constitution should provide for equal educational opportunity, but the manner in which it should be done should be carried out by statute because of the changing conditions from one time to another, and the legislature needs to address that point You know, it should be required that the legislature address
18 it, but let them carry it out.
19
I don't know whether the other two gentlemen
20 agree with me or not.
21
MR. HACKNEY: I think perhaps you're right. You
22 see, the constitution is saying what you're going to do and
23 not specifically how you're going to get there from here.
24 Hopefully the statute would set this up.
25
MR. STEVENS: I have a question on the question.
1,
PAGE 76
What would you put in?
:~;
~:.: ;
2
I struggled with this some, and I don't know
3 specifically what you could put in if you want to be specific.
4 I don't understand the
5
MR. HACKNEY: That was the reason for part 2 of the
6 question.
7
MS.' GREENBERG: That's right.
8
MR. HILL: Mr. Adamson raises another point, though.
9 He said yes, it should provide an equal educational oppor-
10
"z
11 j:
.@;~'o..".... ! 14 I'" ::z: 15 .:> '"";;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 ::
tunity for the citizens, it should be a requirement, but we had talked about this earlier whether to change the mandate from an adequate education to something broader.
MR. ADAMSON: That would come in Section I, Paragraph I.
MR. HILL: You would support a change in language to require equal educational opportunity?
MR. ADAMSON: Adequate and equal.
18
MR. HILL: Adequate and equal, so you would support
19 that.
20
MR. ADAMSON: That's really what I said, but then
21 let the details be
22
A VOICE: And the money.
23
MS. GREENBERG: Would you also, Mr. Hackney and
24 Mr. Stevens, agree with that mandate providing for an
25 adequate and equal educational opportunity for all citizens?
PAGE 77
MR. HACKNEY: I think that's about what the thing
2 does at the present time, or it implies it,
3
MR. ADAMSON: I think that's what it's attempting,
4 but it really doesn't say it.
5
MR. HACKNEY: It implies it, but it doesn't
6 specifically say it in those specific terms.
7
MR. HACKNEY: I thought maybe you all would take up
8 the thing on page 69 there on Section VIII about freedom of
9 association. Is that something you don't pian to address?
10
CzI 11 i=
'o.."....
~ 12 ~
~F~ 14 .~.. '<"l :J: 15 .:. CI '":;) 16 .~.. o Z <l 17 :
MS. GREENBERG: That is being addressed in another subcommittee, and I have done some research on it and we can go into that, but I don~t know if it's necessary right now,
MR.. HACKNEY: I had no particular comment to make, I just wondered how that got past --
MR. ADAMSON: Could I raise two other questions that have given me problems, and one of course is on page 71 of the constitution I'm using, I don't know which one you're
18 using, which consolidation is provided by 51 percent of the
19 registered voters in each district shall vote in the election. 20 Is that
21
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We handled that the other day.
22 We said it should not, we said a simple majority.
23
MR. GREENE: Of those voting,
24
MR. ADAMSON: Under the same section, Paragraph II,
25 Section (d), trustees, local trustees. Those don't need to
PAGE 78
exist any more.
2
MR. HILL: I don't know exactly where you are.
3
MR. ADAMSON: On page 72 of this document, I don't
4 know what document you have.
5
MS. GREENBERG: What article and section?
6
MR. ADAMSON: It reads under Paragraph II,
7 Subsection (d), the General Assembly shall have authority to
8 make provision for local trustees of each school in a county
9 system.
10
."z
11 j:
'o."..
~ 12 ~
~r~14 ! !;; :~z: 15 .:J "'~" 16 .~.. Q z
17 :
MR. HILL: This was omitted from the revised draft of 1970 and '64, and I don't see a need for it either.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We haven't even addressed it, but I agree with you, I think it ought to be eliminated.
MR. ADAMSON: I just wanted to call your attention to it. I think the boards of education operate better where they don't have that millstone to deal with .
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Do we have any th ~t have
18 trustees?
19
MR. ADAMSON: Yes, we've still got some. All they
20 do is create problems.
21
MR. HENRY: Is that a salaried position?
22
MR. ADAMSON: No.
23
MR. HENRY: A dollar a year position, or is iteren
24
that?
25
MS. GREENBERG: Okay. Any other questions or
PAGE 79
comments from any subcommittee members or any visitors?
,"
f
2
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Let me say to Mr. Adamson.
3 Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hackney, we certainly appreciate your
4 coming and giving us your time, coming and addressing this
5 subcommittee today. Your comments will be most helpful as
6 we get into these issues ourselves.
7
Let me say it is 12:21, do you want to take a break?
8 I'm primarily addressing the committee. Do you want to take
9 a break, just a short break and go on or do you want to take
,~: .. \
10
CI Z
11 i=
'0..".... 12 '"
@rl ! 14 ... ':"z: 15 ~ CI '::"> 16 .'z.". Q Z 17 ''""
a lunch break? MS. COOK: I really can't stay any longer myself,
I must ask permission to leave. I'm sorry. MR. GREENE: I would rather take a short break. MR. HILL: Could you stay for ten minutes? We may
be able to zip through this. CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Let's take about a five-minute
break. we'll come back and we'll try to get away from here by
18 quarter to one.
19
"
20
(A brief recess.) CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Let's go on with our business
21 and maybe get away as soon as we can.
22
Let's go down the decision agenda and try to reach
23 a consensus like we did last time, and this will give the
24 staff something that they can go ahead and work with in
25 working on a draft.
PAGE 80
Number 1, "Should the s:ate be required to assume a 2 greater responsibility for the financing of public education?
3
What was your feeling on that, Ms. Cook?
4
MRS. COOK: Let me see, what did I write down here.
5
I think I said yes. I just took some notes and
6 jotted -- I'm going to say yes right now, but I think it
7 needs to be qualified.
8
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Joe?
9
MR. GREENE: I'll say yes, and without getting into
10
zCJ
@;;11 ..joa..::.. ! 14 IOIl :I: 15 ~ aC:J ::> 16 .~.. oz 17 :
a lot of comments I am concerned that the percentage, the
distribution of cost has constantly increased over the past
twenty years as was pointed out from the local effort, and I
think that it's just about reached the point where we've got
to do something about that.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay. I agree, I said yes too. don't
Of course, I go along, I/think that what we need to
get, the document ~tself, the constitution needs to get
18 specific as to how that should be done. I think that should
19 be handled by statute, but I do think it needs to be addressed
20 in some kind of broad sense.
21
MR. HILL: I think this goes back again to the same
22 provision we were talking about at the last meeting, the
23 purpose, the first statement of what is the obli.gation of
24 the state of Georgia with respect to education.
25
MR. GREENE: Yes.
PAGE 81
MR. HILL: We heard some suggestions at the very
2 end of the first part of the meeting that we should include
3 some language about equal educational opportunity as one of
4 the mandates of the state, so we may draft some language for
5 your consideration, but as Mike was pointing out at the break
6 Freeman Leverett in the last meeting when this came up stated
7 that if you include such language in here you may have all
8 your school systems being run by superior court judges,
9 state superior court judges, because if they see that equal
10
.CzI
11 j:
.o<.>..
@;I ! 14 I'<"l :t ..15 .:l CI
;;;)
16 .~.. Q Z <l
17 ::;
educational opportunity then they-Ire going to be the ones to determine what is actually being meant, so that will be the other side of the argument, but I think that's how we will address this in our draft, a restatement of t hat first paragraph, first section of this article.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay. Did you want to add any more comments to that?
MRS. COOK: No. I think that sums up my feelings.
18
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Number 2, "Should the local
19 property tax continue to be the primary source of revenue
20 for local school systems?"
21
MRS. COOK: I agree with the consultant who
22 suggested we change the language to major or important
23 source, and I wasn't too sure that the issue of whether it
24 is already a primary source was cleared up, because one
25 person said it's not a primary source to begin with, but it
PAGE 82
is a significant source. I think the other two did agree it
2 is a primary source.
3
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think it depends on where
4 you're coming from when you say source. If you look at it
5 from the total package of what we get to operate our schools
6 on. it is not the primary source, the state funds which are
7 derived from other methods of taxation is our primary source,
8 but if you're looking at it strictly. from a local level like
9 as a board member and you're levying your taxes down there
:".;
10 then it is a primary source. the only source really.
11 ".Z..
.'0Q"...
MRS. COOK: Then I would say yes with all other
@ r l12 '" problems being considered. MS. GREENBERG: The question was raised because the
! 14 ... constitution does not really address which type of property
':z":
15 .: is used for educational purposes, but it was an issue because
16
":.'>"..
.z..
we may want to put that in, but since it only addresses
17 .'Cz.".l property, it just says property there's no reason we have to
18 even put in real property or personal property.
19
MRS. COOK: I think most of our experts have
20 suggested that we not be any more specific about drawing
21 road maps than we have to be.
22
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Sometimes you can lock yourself
23 in with a constitutional provision that could really be a
24 detriment.
25
MR. HILL: And I think the point was made, and an
PAGE 83
important one, that the extent to which the state would take
2 over the entire financing of public education and take away
3 the local property tax is the extent to which you take away
4 local control.
5
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: That's right.
6
MR. HILL: So there seemed to be a feeling we've
7 got to maintain some local property tax.
8
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: So we can maintain control.
9 That's my feeling.
10
CzI
.11 io.=.:.
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 1;; :r 15 .:l C:I ::l 16 ~... Q Z 17 ~
MR. GREENE: That sums up my feelings.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: All right. Number 3 , "Should
independent school boards be given the same authority to set the local tax as county school boards?"
MRS. COOK: If you're going to allow them to exist, I say they should have the same rights as any other boards, so I say yes to that .
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I'm of the opinion and I get
18 the feeling from last time the other members of the committee
19 because they're not with us today pretty well feel like this
20 is an opportunity or a proper time to do away with these
21 exceptionalities that we have as it relates to local school
22 systems whether they operate under a charter, whether they're
23 classified independently, so
24
MRS. COOK: They have essentially the same obliga-
25 tions, the same responsibilities, so they should have the
PAGE 84
same rights and opportunities to do those things.
2
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Shall we move on, then?
3
MR. GREENE: Yes.
4
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Number 4, "Should a specific
5 millage limitation on property taxes which can be imposed by
6 local boards of education be retained in the constitution?"
7
MRS. COOK: I say yes.
8
MR. GREENE: Yeah .
9
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I agree.
10
MR. GREENE: I think that other alternatives ought
to be explored, and I don't know whether we can address
ourselves to that in the constitution or not, but I do feel
that other than the amendment route I think there ought to
be other methods explored.
MR. HILL: Is the twenty-mill limitation adequate
with you?
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think it's adequate now.
18
MRS. COOK: It's adequate if we can get together
19 on the Bibb County board.
20
MR. HENRY: Of course, to the extent you mandate
21 equal educational opportunity, like they were saying, you
22 may have Treut1in County has to levy over twenty mills to get
23 to the same level as DeKa1b County does leveling 13 mills
24 or 12 mills or something like that, so, you know, the method
25 of going beyond twenty mills, would that facilitate this
PAGE 85
equal educational opportunity that you want to put in here?
", "
2
I think that mechanism needs to -- you know, we need
3 to take a strong look at that mechanism.
4
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Maybe we ought to look at
5 Question 6 at this point which says "Should the present
6 method of removing or increasing the local millage limitation
7 be retained in the constitution?"
8
That's what you were getting at.
9
MR. HENRY: Right.
10
..,
z 11 Ia-:
(@)F~ @~ 12 ."a0.":.
! 14 I'" :r
.15 ..:.,I a: ::>
16 z... Q
..17 aZ:
MRS. COOK: I don't really -- I heard so many things pro and con here, and I'm really not clear in my mind about what the advantages and disadvantages are of constitutional amendment versus what they call statutory authorization, and I think several people have spoken for and against each of 'these postures, so I'm not too sure how I feel about where the limitation should be, how they should be established, whether in the constitution or by statute
18 here, but I do think some control ought to be mandated
19 somewhre, so I'm sort of ambivalent here.
20
MR. HILL: There seems to be general agreement in
21 the discussion I think that there should be some method
22 provided for in the constitution to allow local systems to
23 raise that twenty-mill limitation or to reduce it, and if it
24 is provided for in the constitution my feeling is that the
25 present provision is not that bad, it's just too wordy and
PAGE 86
it can be reduced, and if you just had a clear authorization
~\:
2 to the General Assembly to provide by local act for the
3 reduction or increase in the limitation subject to referendum,
4 as long as that was put in there it would have the same effect
5 as a local amendment, this change couldn't happen without the
6 people voting on it locally, and if that change were made
7 then I think that would be all that would be necessary.
8
MRS. COOK: Is that what you're saying about
9 Number 6, about the present method?
10
11 z~ ~
'o.."....
:@-- .
~12 '"
That makes sense to me. I would agree with that. MS. GREENBERG: Isn't it true that six districts that have authorized millage over twenty have done it by -have they gone this route. or have they gone the
14 >I:ir;
15 01)
~
'";:) 16 .~..
oz
17 :
constitutional amendment? MR. HILL: I think they may have gone the local
amendment . MS. GREENBERG: Which may speak for the fact that
18 ParagBaph 2 is so confusing.
19
MRS. COOK: If we vote yes for Number 6, then we
20 have to say no to Number 4. Is that not the same thing?
21
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: No.
22
MR. HILL: The specific millage limitation of
23 twenty mills would be retained. In other words, that would
24 be across the board.
25
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Everybody can levy up to twenty
PAGE 87
mills now. If you want to go beyond the twenty mi:J.B, then
2 you would have to go to this what we're talking about in
3 Number 6, that mechanism to go beyond that, which I think is
4 good.
5
MR.. GREENE: You could do it under local amendment.
6
MR.. HENRY: We would like to do away with local
7 constitutional amendments as much as possible, and that's the
8 reason I say should you facilitate it or should you make it
9 clear so that people don't have to go the local amendment
10
Czl
.11 ~a.o.:.
~ 12 ~
~F~ l 14 I'-" :I: 15 ol) aC:l :::> 16 ~ Qz- 17 :
route. MR. GREENE: What alternative -MR. HENRY: It's a referendum what, what is it,
51 percent. CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think you can handle it the
same way that you would handle consolidation or to handle the setup of your board, whether you want an elected board or an appointed board. Couldn't it be handled in the same way,
18 Mel?
19
MR. HILL: Yes.
20
MR. HENRY: Have them do it by ordinance and
21 advertise the ordinance, and then have a referendum on it
22 or something like that.
23
And another thing that was brought out is that
24 perbaps you may want to put a condition in here that where
25 your boards have gone to be an elected board and therefore
PAGE 88
you do have that political accountability to the people you
2 may want to give them the discretion to raise that limitation
3 subject to the vote of the next county school board election.
4
I don't know -- I know peqie have said, you said
5 that where they're accountable to the people you don't have
6 that great a problem with them going beyond the twenty-mill
7 limitation, but where they're strictly appointed you don't
8 like for them to have -- you wouldn't like for them to have thE
9 authority to go beyond that twenty-mill limitation, so I mean
10 that may even facilitate having county boards elected.
CI
11 ~
I just throw that out as an alternative.
'..o."....
~ 12 ~
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We would really be making some
~Fi! distinction between boards of education, appointed boards and 14 ... elected boards .
'"
:r
15 ~
MR. GREENE: That's what we don't want to do. We
CI
'";;;)
16 .~.. don't want to make aryexceptions for boards, systems or
Q
Z
17 : anyone else.
18
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL ~ That's right.
19
I think personally I like the twenty-mill limitation
20 as it stands right now. That seems to be an adequate limit.
21 I think there's only one school system or maybe two that have
22 exceeded that. There are some that have voted to go beyond
23 it that have not aen gone up to that, so that seems to be an
24 adequate limitation, and then with the mechanism to go beyond
25 it, simplifying that mechanism --
PAGE 89
MR. HILL: Yes, that's right. The present mechanism
2 really just needs to be clarified and simplifled and it will
3 probably work fine.
4
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay. Question Number 5, we'll
5 go back to that one. It says "Should Chatham County and the
6 city of Savannah continue to be specifically referenced in the
7 constitution?"
8
I think we
9
MRS. COOK: I say why not. It doesn't matter to me.
10 I don't see the advantage or the disadvantage.
MR. GREENE: I say a resounding no. I don't think
any reference ought to be made to any system personally.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think that holds with what
we ---
MRS. COOK: I just don't have any strong feelings
about: it one way or the other, so I yield to the majority.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay. Number 7, "In those
18 school systems containing a power plant, the tax wealth per
19 pupil is typically far in excess of neighboring school
20 systems. Should an attempt be made to equalize the disparity
21 created by this situation?"
22
MRS. COOK: In view of the second question and how
23 impossible it is to do, I would have to say no to the original
24 question since I can't answer the second question.
25
MS. GREENBERG: They're envisioning some sort of
PAGE 90
regulation on a local level. If we could possibly somehow
2 phrase something in the constitution, bring it to that level
3 and get it out of local politics, because really power plants
4 are financed, the burden goes on the people of the entire
5 state, and who's profiting is one county, so it's inequitable.
6 I don't know how we could do it.
7
MR. GREENE: Suppose if you had a system where the
8 revenues would flow to the state and then would be disbursed
9 from the state for educational purposes --
~:.
10
MS. GREENBERG: Exactly. Now, should this be
I!I
Z
11 i=
'0."".".
elevated to constitutional status, or should that be
@ r l12 '"
DR. PYLES: I have worried about this before we got
here, for several weeks I have been concerned as to whether
14 ~ l-
or not -- I firmly believe the utility part of the taxes
v>
:z:
15 .:l should be taken out and put and pooled allover the state.
1.:1
'";;)
16 .Iz.I.I Whether it should be a constitutionally mandated requirement
Q
Z
'" 17 III and how you define utility would be another question, or let
18 the legislature do it. I feel strongly about it.
19
MR. GREENE: I do too.
20
DR. PYLES: I'm kind of disturbed about Heard
21 County.
22
MR. HILL: Maybe if we just spoke to this in the
23 sense of an authorization to the General Assembly to provide
24 for special taxation of utilities for purposes of statewide
25 distribution of the tax, just an authorization rather than a
PAGE 91
mandate it would be all right. We would be throwing it to the
2 General Assembly to do it.
3
DR. PYLES: Those counties would really holler,
4 Part of that of course goes into their M&O.
5
MS. GUY: I have a question. If the money is
6 pooled in and it's to be distributed statewide, where would th
7 distribution process be?
8
I think that question was raised earlier with the
9 example of the sales tax. What about equitable distribution
10 of this money?
z~
11 j:
'"oa..
MR. HILL: That would be thrown into the legislature
@ r l12 ~ too.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: That would be statutory.
! 14 t-
MR. HILL: That would be part of the bill creating
'<x"l
15 .:. the tax or the special levy. It would also have to address ~ '";;)
16 .~.. the distribution formula, so that that would be for the o
Z
<l
17 :::; legislature as well.
18
MS. GUY: Give it all to the legislature?
19
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Let them deal with this
20 distribution formula, because the distribution formulas can
21 change as times change.
22
MR. HENRY: I think in light of your first decision
23 to sayan equal education, I don't think you can start 24 dealing with utility property in the constitution. The
25 legislators know equitableness, for lack of a better word,
PAGE 92
of the taxation of utility property in the state, and it is
2 returned to the state for taxation and then disbursed out to
3 the counties for their general revenues, I'm not talking
4 about school finance right now, I'm just talking about
5 general finance.
6
Once you mandate equal, I think if you like this
7 district power equalization or, you know, if that could be
8 improved upon once you say equal I think they're going to
9 have to adopt something like that, and I think that maybe one
/]
10
Czl 11 i=
'o.."....
~ 12 ~
~ri
! 14 I'" :I:
15 .:I
Cl
:'"2
16 .~.. Q Z
17 :
of the first places they may look would be to the property taxes on utilities, but I don't think you should put it in the constitution that utility property will be -- you know, what you're doing is you're earmarking funds for education, and then to set the distribution problem which has to my understanding always been the obstacle in earmarking anything for education, so I think if you just leave it -- you tell the General Assembly you want it to be' equal, and then you
18 have the judiciary to make sure they provide equal education,
19 and you just leave it up there to their discretion on how to
20 make it equal, whether it's by public utility property or by
21 an extra cent sales tax. I think the mandate tbat it be
22 equal is sufficient I would think. I don't know. I'm sure
23 you're all in strong disagreement with me.
24
MR, GREENE: That appeals to me initially, but I
25 have some deep concerns about those isolated counties where
PAGE 93
the utilities are principally located and how unequal it is
2 as it stands ..
3
MS. GREENBERG: And particularly since they're
4 I guess agreed that adequate implies equal, and that's what
5 is going on now. The present situation is inequitable, I
6 think we almost need a provision --
7
MR. HILL: Why don't we say this, why don't we try
8 to come up with some language which you can then react to?
9
I mean the fact is we're undecided about this
10
~
"z
11 I-
'o"
~
12 ~
~r~ ! 14
l-
ll>
<l :I:
15 ~
"'":::l
16 .~..
Q
Z
<l
17 :
whether we should say anything specifically about utilities or not, and until we have some language drafted we're not going to really know whether to answer that yes or no, and it would be easy to say if you have it '~ell, gee, maybe we'd better forget it," but why don't we work on this --
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think that's a good idea, to try to work on some language, and then if we can agree on some language fine; if we can't, then we may not even want to
18 address the matter.
19
Okay. "Should the state be required by the
20 constitution to finance special schools (schools for
21 vocational tech, adult education, exceptional children)?
22
We pretty much got the -- Well, the consultants
23 we had pretty well stated they didn't see any need to change
24 anything.
25
MRS. COOK: That's being done.
PAGE 94
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Right.
2
You have looked at this, Mel. Do you all find --
3 is there any objection that you have been able to come up
4 with "in terms of that section?
5
MR. HILL: You know, next time we were planning to
6 devote the meeting to a discussion of special schools and
7 this section, and to hear from others about it, so I would
8 say why don't we leave this question until then and we can
9 think about this a little further.
~
10
":z:
11 j:
..'0."....
12 '"
@rl 14 ~ lv> :I: 15 o!) "'"::l 16 .Iz.I.I Q Z '" 17 III
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay, MRS. COOK: I would like to do that too. CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: All right. Good enough. Let's go to 9, then. "Should two or more boards of education be able to contract with each other for shared facilities, under Article VIII, Section V, Paragraph IV, and maintain shared administrative authority, rather than singular authority in one board?"
18
MR, GREENE: I think so, I can see some economies
19 of operation in doing this, and I think that the systems can
20 work out among themselves some kind of equitable representatiol.
21
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think the key to the thing
22 is this. If we say they should be able to contract with each
23 other, wouldn't their contract specify how they would in turn
24 control whatever voice?
25
DR. PYLES: That was the problem with that case,
PAGE 95
the Tifton versus Spier case where two units tried to do
-r
2 this. but they left the governing authority with just one
3 board rather than with the other.
4
No. no. They were trying to structure it that both
5 boards would be able to operate a high school, the court came
6 in and said you couldn't have that. only one board could
7 operate, either one or the other, not both. you can't have a
8 joint board, and I think that's what was suggested here by
9 Clark was to provide some mechanism where one or two
:.'
t-
10 representatives from each board -- not to create a new
11
"z
i=
board, but to operate that school.
..0G..o..:
@ r l12 Go:
MR. HILL: Was this in lieu of consolidation? I
mean is this really a way short, is this a method short of
14 .~.. consolidation and therefore the thought is if we provide for
'"
:I:
15 .:. this the consolidation might be more attractive?
"Go:
::>
... 16 III Z
DR. PYLES: I think it would be easier to do this.
Q
Z
17 Go: III
because presently what you have is when two boards are trying
18 to combine and operate jointly a high school, according to that
.,
19 court case you cannot do that .
'..
20
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Like Tri-County High School,
21 one of those boards of educ::ation controls the high school.
22
DR. PYLES: That's right. The parents of these
23 other kids have no control. no way to impact it except just
24 take their kids out, and I don't know how they're going to do
25 that.
PAGE 96
MS. GREENBERG: We just have to work on language.
'.~
2
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: What we're saying is we need
3 the provision in here to allow singular or joint control or
4 any other kind of method that the boards might want to work
5 out that would make it constitutional.
6
DR. PYLES: Right, so the courts would not throw it
7 out, or at least the judge did in that case.
8
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: The judge threw it out on the
9 basis that it was not provided for in the constitution?
10
z"
11 i=
..0~....
12 ~
.@1-/I
14
1
>-
I-
':"r
15 .:.
"~
;:)
16 .Iz.I.I
Q
Z 17 ~
III
DR. PYLES: He said either one or the other, but he said you can't do it the way you guys have structured it.
I think, Mel, to answer your question, yes, that I think would facilitate ult{mately more cooperation in consolidation which I still think is kind of the bias of what I keep hearing .
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Do you all agree 'with that? MRS. COOK: Yes.
18
MR. GREENE: Yes.
19
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: 10, "Should the constitution
20 specifically prov~de for the manner in which equal educa-
21 tional opportunity for the citizens be realized?"
22
MR. GREENE: I say no.
23
MRS. COOK: No.
24
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: No .
25
MR. HILL: But shall provide that the equal
PAGE 97
educational opportunity saal1 be required?
,,.
2
MRS. COOK: Oh, yes.
3
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Okay. Very good.
4
Mel, will you all have time to send out a draft of
5 what we talked about today?
6
MR. HILL: Yes. We'll send it out with the notice
7 of the next meeting.
8
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Very well.
9
Thank you all.
10
Czl 11 j:
.'0.."... 12 '"
@rl 14 ! ~ '<"l :I: 15 ol) Cl '"::> 16 .CZ.D. c Z <l 17 'C"D
(Whereupon, at 1:00 p.m. the subconmittee meeting was adj ourned . )
+++ ++ +
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on July 10, 1980
,
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7~10-80
Proceedings. pp. 3-7
SECTION I: PUBLIC EDUCATION
Paragraph I:
Public education; free public education prior to college or postsecondary level; support by taxation. pp. 7-21, 75-77, 80-81, 96-97
SECTION V: LOCAL SCHOOL SYSTEMS
Paragraph II: Boards of education. pp. 77-78
Paragraph V: Power of boards to contract with each other. pp. 72-75, 94-96
Paragraph VII: Special schools. pp. 63-72, 93-94
SECTION VI: LOCAL TAXATION FOR EDUCATION
Paragraph I: Local taxation for education. pp. 21-55, 56-63, 81-85, 89-93
(Independent school systems and power of taxation. pp. 36-44, 83-84)
Paragraph II: Increasing or removing tax rate. pp. 55-56, 85-89
l'AGl<~
1
3
STATE OF GEORGIA
4
COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
5
of the
CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA
Subcommittee on State Board of Education
10
:.,:)
,-
iI
':
)
! '-,
):'.'
i,\.
.:U
\,
Room 40la
State Capitol
Atlanta, Georgia
Wednesday, JUly 16, 1980 9:20 a.m.
PRESENT WERE:
SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS:
CHARLES MEREDITH, CHAIRMAN JOHN GRAHAM MS. MIRIAM GRAHAM ODELL OWENS DR. WILLIAM PRESSLY SENATOR TERRELL STARR
SELECT COMMITTEE STAFF:
MS. VICKIE GREENBERG MELVIN HILL
'.
OTHERS:
'I.')
Z
!'
DR. CALVIN ADAMSON DR. JIM MULLINS
,,:,~Vlr'
/- ~ \, ',r,c,;;;..') .-
jJ
-PR-O- -C -E -E -D-IN- -G -5
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I guess we can start. As you
,know, this is the second meeting of what is scheduled as three
meetings and sort of fact finding sessions from various persons
whom we feel can be of assistance to us in trying to carry out
(, our assignment here.
7
We had anticipated having the State Superintendent
with us this morning, but he could not make it and he has made
() himself available to us on the 28th of this month and I thought
10 that I S important enough for us to have a meeting to listen to ..,
z
11 ;:him. I know itls probably an imposition on the part of the o .">,.
I. ~ committee members who have to come so far, but I think we should
\-.
z
ego ahead and convene and those who can come can come 50 is
./ ./
!,~ ;:: that agreeable wi th everybody?
<::
I
15 ,~
';:-..r'.:
::l
Q;l
11" 7:
'.":\
L
MR. GRAHAM: What time do you want to start? CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Hels available at 9:45, but lid
; like us to meet at 9: 00 because Mr. Vann, who we thought was
going to be with us this morning and could not be here, we will
meet with him at 9:00 and at 9:45 we will listen to the 2U superintendent.
We have another meeting scheduledfor August 7, which
I went back to my office and realized that lim going to be out
of town. Illl be in Houston.
MR. HILL: August 6.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I I 11 be in New York and then
:'\(:1': 4
Houston, that's right, August 6.
2
Since we're going to meet on the 28th, I would like
3 to move that to the next week, if we could, and on that meeting,
4 the meeting in August, we hope to have our first review, the
first draft copy of the document. Does that present a problem?
MR. HILL: We have a meeting already scheduled one
week later on the 13th so I would hope we could make it either
Tuesday or Thursday of that week instead of Wednesday.
I}
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: If we have it on the 14th what
would that do? That's the meeting we had scheduled for that
dz
11 ~ time anyway?
~~ 12 u
sv
~
MR. HILL: We had scheduled one for the 6th; that was
O' rG--:-~J~ Jj"-"-""-. v~ the only meeting scheduled for August.
'-- /
'"
,'"
,I "
DR. PRESSLY: Would there be a possibility of
"1:
I.", .~ following through on your Monday and going on over to the 18th?
.l::
1(, ~"' ,~
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's okay with me, the 18th.
a
Z
: 7 :<i:i:
MR. HILL: Is the 11th bad for you?
DR. PRESSLY: I'm out that complete week, but that's
19 ,alright. Somebody is going to miss anytime of course.
MR. HILL: The 18th would be alright.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. That means that on the 18th
22 that probably will be the committee's last time as a group
looking at the document although there will be a final document
developed between the 18th and the first of September. That is
when we have to turn it in, right?
MR. HILL: No, not exactly. I think my suggestion
I
I would be if we plan the meeting for the 18th maybe go all day for the purposes of finalizing. It will be the first draft, but also trying to come up with a recommendation. Then we will
) work on that between the 18th and the first and second week of (, September and have one more meeting of this subcommittee to
finalize the recommendation and it will go to the Full Committee. 1'1 I think middle September is fine.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Let s review then. We have !( the July 28th, 9:00 a.m., and then August 18th and the 18th is 1Ii; the all day meeting.
MR. HILL: Let me also say that the meeting on the
,l
:': 28th, the committee is going to have to make it' s own decision '; on this decision agenda. We haven't done that. It may be an " ;,: all day meeting on the 28th as well. It really depends on how
+long it would take the committee to go through this, but you
~ can't draft something until the committee decides. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Alright, this morning we
have two resource persons, Dr. Jim Mullins, who is Executive Director of the Georgia Educational Improvement Council, and we're going to have Dr. Cal Adamson, Associate State School Superintendent and we have Mr. Milligan. Mr. Milligan, what we tried
MR. HILL: Mullins. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Mullins, Mullins. I've got it
6
now. Do you have a copy of this agenda? DR. MULLINS: Yes, sir~ CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What we've done is to allow a
resource person to pick up one at the time and comment on it~ I Also, we'll do like we did the last time, members can have
comments on the same item and we'll take those too. Okay, go ahead.
DR. MULLINS: Well, in responding to the first item about the constitutional mandate of an adequate education for 10 the citizens be changed, it is my feeling that it should not.
I.:
ii ;:I think you'll find as you look across constitutions in other
.,
., ~~ states you'll find similar statements. It is our opinion that
T
.:' of an adequate program of education So I feel no on that one.
':
;~
::>
i \' 'L"
DR. ADAMSON: I also answered no and I won't be able--
,:.
I.
1C' .~. I'm Cal Adamson. I won't be able to stay with you all the time.
I'm going to have to slip out after awhile.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let me suggest that we take you
in turn
.11
DR. ADAMSON: That's alright with me. Jim and I are
, ) used to agreeing and disagreeing
.~ .\
DR. MULLINS: Mostly agreeing.
'4
DR. ADAMSON: I used that term first, did I not?
.~
DR. MULLINS: You certainly did.
__ . _ - - - - -
-,-_.~,_._.
DR. ADAMSON: Let me say to you that one of the things
that has sort of concerned me is the question of equal
! educational opportunities which is not really addressed. It
, i was one of the -- Vickie, one of the questions that was raised
~ in the last subcommittee.
MS. GREENBERG: Yes, Subcommittee 2.
DR. ADAMSON: And I'm not so sure that the question
~ . of adequate education -- I certainly feel it should be retained
for this subcommittee somewhere, either in that particular
section or in another question we have here related to Section
v
Z.
!I ~VIII of Article VIII, that the question of equal educational
i ':: opportunities might not be added.
-","
Ii
MR. GRAHAM: Would it be appropriate to ask a
I: ,;; question at this time?
.:,c
DR. ADAMSON: It is for me.
lO'
u
~,
MR. GRAHAM: I'll ask this first to Dr. Mullins. I
(
I
-- <
,Q",; agree with you that the Constitution when you're drafting
a Constitution ought to be in more general terms than specific,
l:j but I believe it ought to be clear that the constitutional
language ought to be more than simply aspirational and it ought
to confer rights that are enforceable by children upon the
default of the state. If the Constitution is going to confer
rights that are enforceable by children if the state should
default then I did need for you to define what adequate means.
DR. MULLINS: Well, I don't have the definition of
i' \i: t
8
adequate, but I think, as I said, John, you have a correspondence
through your statute in the adequate program for education and
3 you have definition there. Of course, as you well know, each
4 'of the areas of the adequate program of education have not been
S funded. That might relate itself down to another item on this
h . agenda. When you start changing words, and as an attorney I
, think you're well aware of the necessity to be precise, but
8 when you start beco~ing precise you have the same difficulty
') in the new term. If you say equal opportunity that carries
\0 many connotations other than just what might be adequate. So I
]) ~don't really know what adequate means outside of what the :) .''J~
~~ t"' ~]]. ustatute has told us it means. The Constitution will at least get us into the category of providing as a primary responsibility
11
j
,. ~ of the state, education of its citizens. It says adequate.
1:
]5 ~Other terms may be used, but I don't think I would be interested
,"
::>
]6 ~in seeing that changed.
2:
<
)7 r;(.
MR. GRAHAM: Dr. Adamson, suppose the Constitution
1S said that it is the duty of the state to provide an equal
19 ,educational opportunity with high quality educational programs
20 'for every child and there we've put in equal educational 21 opportunity and substituted high quality for adequate?
DR. ADAMSON: John, that gives me a little bit of a
23 problem because again the definition of what is high quality --
24 Is a court going to make that decision as to what high .quality
25 is? I assume that it would. I think you would still run into
Li-.
.. _
~
"
the same difficulties as I envision what the ramifications of
that would be.
MR. GRAHAM: I was referring there to language that's
i found in the Texas, Virginia and Florida Constitutions.
DR. ADAMSON: Uh-huh. I think New Jersey also has
" something in their Constitution dealing with quality and as you
may be -- I don't know if you remember exactly the language that
x ,was included in that, but the Cahill Decision shut down that
q school system because -- Maybe that's part of what ought to be
10 here, but I just don't know. I'm not that well versed.
I: ,
cr~
MR. GRAHAM: You have no argument with the equal
()
>.
DR. ADAMSON: I do not. As a matter of fact, in my 1,1 : opinion that should be an addition to it.
:>
DR. MULLINS: If you do get into the court on
.1:
::>
I,.} f;:':l September 1 that's basically what you're going to be talking
l
" :i
about
anyway
I
suspect.
MR. GRAHAM: That and the definition of adequate.
;}
MR. GREENBERG: Do you both agree then that if we
change the language to provide an adequate and equal education
.'1 it would not -- it would be beneficial rather than left it?
DR. MULLINS: It would give us another term to define.
MR. GRAHAM: I think it's equal opportunity rather
than equal education.
DR. ADAMSON: Equal opportunity, I would not want it
10
to be equal education. I use the term equal educational
~'.:
opportunity.
DR. MULLINS: That's been pretty well accepted in
+ the courts. They haven't had too much difficulty with that
one, but just like in Rodriguez when you started talking about
quality then you'd had tremendous difficulties. You look at
our state situation in education where we believe in local
8 control to certain degrees and we also believe in state
<) control in certain degrees and we haven't yet defined what the
state ought to do and what the locals ought to do and where
.;: maybe they could best provide certain kinds of educational
o
"-
'(/(r~.i~.J~)\)r-"~''1'2'o
~
J_,.~
opportunities. So as a result, you don't have educational plan for the delivery of education
an to
established children.
","\-.,.~. ::// // /
"
t~ Without tha.t, it's very difficult to get into this "quality"
TC
15 ~ question and even then you're into some subjective criteria.
::J
i (1 .;'
MR. GRAHAM: You're right. The definition of
Cl
7
<
1'-: -;"
1 ,::.:., adequate is much more difficult than finding out whether
there's equal opportunity. Do you believe that the Constitution 19 ought to specify unacceptable causes of unequal educational ,:() opportunities?
DR. MULLINS: I don't. I think that ought to be left
to the statutes.
23
MR. GRAHAM: For example, should the Constitution
~,..., say that no child shall be discriminated against in the
'S provision of educational resources on account of race, religion,
n--------------- . -- .. ------------ ..-.--.----.--- . -.--.-----.-
II
1 : color, national origin, sex, etc.? I'
, II
DR. MULLINS: I think there you've got your 14th
J I Amendment and you've got your First Amendment. They impinge
J : upon us whether our State Constitution states that or not and
, therefore we are going to fall into conformance, if you want to '
,
I
6 i use that term, with those constitutional rights that are
guaranteed to each citizen of this state and of this country.
x 'So I think, once again, when you start trying to delineate and
'1 you start trying to define further in the Constitution you
begin to compound the problems within the Constitution. That's
(~
7.
!I ;:where your statutes can best, in my opinion at least, support CJ "-
~ the Constitution and if the statute doesn't stand the
I2'
~ constitutional test your profession is enhanced.
,.
~
MR. GRAHAM: Should the Constitution at any point
~
I.
~ state why education is important? I'll give an example of a
::'
,:0
~: Constitution that does that, one that says: "Knowledge, self-
,~ :~; reliance and an understanding of the democratic process being
safeguards of liberty and thE. bUlwark of a free and open I') government, the state of shall maintain a system of free public
education."
DR. MULLINS: I think not because any definition of
that type you come with you're going to add things that seem
,,
~-) , at the moment just the perfect statement, only to find out on
reflection a week later after the constitutional referendum has
passed why did we not add this and if the Constitution doesn't
f'"V; l: 12
give vent to it can we, in fact, statutorily add it? So I
2 would think not. I wouldn I t like to see that.
3
MR. GRAHAM: The Supreme Court of Georgia has already
4 :i done all of that anyhow, I think, in cases. Alright, I'm sorry,
5 : I didn' t mean to take the floor.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's okay. Any other comments?
7 Alright. Proceed to the second one. It says, "Should the
8 provision stating that an adequate education for the citizens
9 I: shall be a primary obligation of the 'State of Georgia' be
10 changed?".
, '.:>
, 7.
11 i-
-':">
>.
DR. MULLINS: I said no. I think it should be a
.
12 ~ primary obligation of the State of Georgia.
(~ ~'~~ "~ 1
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I think the last time
\'S;_
I
14 ~ there was some discussion on what "State of Georgia" -- what
':i
1:
15 ~ does that mean in terms of whether that respon-- Where does '"0:
::>
16 ~<Xl that put that responsibility when you say the "State of 1:'\ z:
17 ,~Georgia"? Does it put it under the governor's office, put it
1f' under the legislature, put it under the courts or where? Is
19 that clear?
20
DR. ~~JLLINS: I think when you say the "State of
Georgia", the "State of Georgia" as a government as opposed to
,
n ! three divisions of government, I think it would sort of impinge
_~, .' on all three. But as a primary obligation of the state, I think
we see all three continually involved in such decisions for
education. We're spending anywhere from 53 to 56 cents of every
rr-- ------.------ .-.---.----,.-.- __._.__ ---.- ---------
I
1 I state dollar in education. Now that certainly indicates a
2 II primary responsibility and obligation to education even though
II
-' \1 it divides out to about 36 cents for primary, secondary, 17
Ii
4 I: cents or so for higher education, but at the same time it II
:!
:1
5
I Ii
indicates
that that responsibility
and
that obligation
is
there
Ii
(, il and is being met from that point of view of revenue. The amount
I,
II
7 [i of time we spend in the General Assembly each year, apart from
il
Ii
k I! appropriations, on educational legislation I think indicates,
Ij
il
9 Ii you know, its obligation and its interest. The number of
iO .., associations that have vested interests in education certainly
z
IJ ~ are coming forth through the General Assembly, through the
o
"-
~,
s~ I)~ ~'" Governor's office. Our state department is a very strong and
)r'!'!"- ~ &~ I~.r"
~_ powerful state department and has been so enhanced by the
,,~"
I
14 ~ General Assembly and given those responsibilities to see the
"r
15 ~ compelling interests of the state being carried out. So I
'"::> 16 ~00 think when we look at all of these things and of course the
a z <
t 7 :~ courts are going to come in with compelling interests, perhaps
lP i not being met by definition of the statute. So I think it
I~ i should remain as a primary obligation of the State of Georgia
20 and not say of the legislature or of the judiciary or of the
executive branch.
22
MR. GRAHAM: Dr. Adamson, would you define primary?
Is that the same thing as fundamental or should the word primary
and fundamental be there?
DR. ADAMSON: That's a word I'm not really sure of,
PAGE 14
II but when I use t~-~:r~ p~~ry .~.....:~~~~ takes ~~~~~~::
2 II priority. That's the way I interpret it.
II
3 II
MR. GRAHAM: In constitutional language, do you
4 Ii understand what the term fundamental means? )1' I[
5 Ii
DR. ADAMSON: Oh, yeah.
6 !I
MR. GRAHAM: Would that be the same thing as what
Ii
7 i: you were talking about as primary?
11
8 II
DR. ADAMSON: Almost, but I don't see them as
II
9 iIlI synonymous quite.
10
MR. GRAHAM: Could you use both words, primary and
z"
11 ~ fundamental obligation?
o
"-
@ .112 "~'
DR. PRESSLY: Primary has to be fundamental, doesn't
it? You don' t need both.
14 ~
DR. ADAMSON: I guess that's a matter of semantics.
<::
:I:
15 ~ I think primary and fundamental almost mean the same thing and
"a:
:>
16 '~" yet I'm not sure that they exactly are synonymous.
oz
17 :ii
MR. GRAHAM: Which one do you like the best?
18
DR. ADAMSON: I like the word fundamental because it's
19 more definitive.
20
DR. MULLINS: It could also be more limiting.
21
MR. GRAHAM: It might be more limiting.
22
DR. ADAMSON: Yes, it could.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH I Dr. Adamson, would you like to
24 come in on the "State of Georgia" issue? Whether thatJs clear--;
25 When we say the State of Georgia everybody knows what we're
_.---~----_._----
1 II talk~ng about?
- - - -- --~--------~-~---
PAGE
15
2 I:1I
DR. ADAMSON. When you say the "State of Georgia"
I' 3 III that means to me the government of the State of Georgia which
4 II takes in all three of the branches of government. I don't have 5 IiI' any problem with that term, "State of Georgia", and I agree tha~
6 II you should not change the primary obligation.
,I
11
7 !IIi
MR. HILL: The draft of 1970, the term "shall be a
II
8 :: primary obligation of the State of Georgia and its political
i1
9 :1 subdivisions". That was a change proposed in the 1970
10 Constitution. Would that kind of change be any problem to you? :
"z 11 ~What we've done before was by stating that it's the obligation
o
Q.
.cv
12 ~of the State of Georgia then there was some feeling that the
(~~\-~_".'!!. ~ ~~fl
local people wouldn't see it as much as their obligation as
"I
14 ~well. So that was kind of the genesis of this question.
'"""
1:
15 '!.l
DR.. ADAMSON: Mr. Hill, I think that touches on
":'"J
16 ~ another problem. If you say education is the primary obligation
az
!
J -; :; of the State of Georgia and the Constitution turns right around
18 I and sets up 159 constitutionally established school boards at
19 the county level plus those independent, what determines who
20 shall have the responsibility for education? What recourse
21 does the state have? That's a little side issue, but I really
11 don't think if the State Board of Education as a part of the
23 !executive branch of government determines that Podunk School 24 'District is not providing an adequate education in Georgia how 2~do you go about seeing that the mandate of the Constitution
PAGE 16
that says the State of Georgia has that responsibility What
2 do you do about it? That's not very clear right now. Jim, I
3 see nothing that gives anybody the authority to do much abOut
4 it.
5
MR. GRAHAM: If we use the term the "State of Georgia"
6 then the legislature can delegate to the political subdl~isions
7 that which it already has and more if it wanted to.
8
DR. MULLINS: But if you say 'and the political
9 subdivisions"then you give the political subdivisions basically
10 equal status with the state.
"z
11 ...
DR. ADAMSON: Well, I don't think they ought tb have
'o"
Q.
w
12 ~ equal status. I do not believe they should have equal status.
!~~Vd ~
\~~~r~
MS. GREENBERG: Could we alleviate the problem of
'--
14 ~I local school systems providing adequate education by changing -~
':<x: 15 ~ I know this is not our jurisdiction, but Section V, Local Schoo1
'"a.::
::J
16 ~ Systems states "authority is granted to county and area boards i
Q Z
<
17 ~ of education to establish and maintain public schools within
18 their limits". Could we make that a stronger statement arid
19 say something like county and area boards of education shall
20 establish and maintain adequate public schools within their
21 limits? And it would be a constitutional mandate which could
22 be enforced by the courts and by the General Assembly.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: When you say shall you imply that
24 they have to.
MS. GREENBE~G: Right.
PAGE 17
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That 's what you want?
2
MS. GREENBERG: Just make a flat mandate, county and
3 area boards of education shall establish and maintain adequate
4 pUblic schools.
5
DR. ADAMSON: Vickie, from my experience I believe
6 that authority has been interpreted by the courts to require
that counties have a school system so I don't think that's the
real problem. As I see it, the real problem is at what point
does the state guarantee that they're going to provide an
10 adequate education? What is the state going to do about it if
Iz:l
11 ~ they don't, if it's determined that they don't? John?
o
"w"
i12 ~
(@) . _.
MR GRAHAM: I don't believe they could do anything. DR: ADAMSON: That s right. I don' t think. The
,--:::...,/
I
i + ~ thing that bothers me about the whole statement is the State of 'r<
15 ~ Georgia is responsible for education as a primary obligation
'::">
J6 '~" but yet that's really all it says.
1
<:
J 7 'i
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Would you recommend that something
18 be added to give the state a right to move if the local
J9 I systems
20
DR. ADAMSON: I think that's one of our long range
21 goals in the department is to look at this possibility because
22 ! we have seen some instances where school systems have not chosen
23 to meet state standards as set by the State Board of Education. 24 ,I What are you going to do about it? The State Board in reality 25 has no option except maybe the possibility of cutting off state
---------- -- ----- ---
PAGE 18
funds. Well, when you cut off state funds that's further
2 deteriorating the situation instead of improving it in my
3 opinion.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Do you think some staternep.t ~bou14
5 go on Section II that would enhance the authority of the state
o Board of Education to act on that?
7
DR. ADAMSON: I don't know what statement it ou.ght
8 to be and I'm not prepared this morning to discuss that.
DR. PRESSLY: Aren't you really saying not to enhance
10 the authority because this statement definitely give s them
cz?
11 ~ the authority it's their responsibility, but rather the method
o
Q.
~
12 ~ of carrying out?
(~ ~~:c;-r~ !"!"- ~
DR. ADAMSON: Of carrying out that responsibility.
~
/
.
14 ~I Perhaps you:' re right. I'm just trying to get at an idea that
I
15.0 that's a problem with me as a school administrator.
<:'
:':':'>'
16 ~...
MR. GRAHAM: If it is a responsibility of the State
Cl
Z
17 ~ of Georgia to provide this then it seems to me that the
18 legislature could enact enabling legislation underneath
19 that to insure that the State of Georgia provides it by putting
20 teeth into the State Board.
21
DR. ADAMSON: I don't know what the answer is, but
in my opinion there needs to be something done to do that.
,.
--'
DR. MULLINS: I think basically this is the mechanism
that we're operating under now. When the legislature gave to
the State Board of Education the authority to develop standards
r---------------- ----- --- ----
PACE 19
I II which take on the guise of administrative laws then that gives
2 !I not only the authority but the mechanism by which to do it. I,Ii
-' 11 Now this is not meant in criticism, but I think the history of
education in Georgia with the local versus state control being
of such paramount concern that the State Board has traditionally
dropped back just before, how would we say, exercising the
authority which I believe it can exercise for many reasons,
political or otherwise.
9
DR. ADAMSON: I think that's probably true, but let
10 me give you a specific example although this may not be the plaqe
,~
z
11 5. to do it. Many of you are aware of the difficulties that '::J "-
12 ''~"" Sumter County Board of Education, the President's home county,
f-
cZ has had. First of all, they do not meet the mandates of the
'n
11- ~ standards that the law provides for the State Board and yet
<
I
15 ~ the Attorney General has said so what? They haven't done it,
'"::J
16 c~o but all you can do is cut the money off that the state has
z
1-;
-<
c~L appropriated.
That doesn't really get at the problem.
That
l(': i further deprives a child of an education rather than enhances
19 ! it to me.
MR. GRAHAM: It's not necessarily that county, but
take a county in the State of Georgia that has an elected school
board and an elected superintendent and these elected people
are the property owners and their objective is low taxes. This
i'
also exists. They're not raising the revenues.
DR. ADAMSON: What can the State Board do about that?
What can the State School Superintendent do about that?
,',
~
2
DR. MULLINS: That he can't.
3
DR. ADAMSON: All this is entwined, I think, and it's
4 a concept I'm trying to get to.
5
MR. HILL: If this provision were -- If there was a
(, statement added in this provision that the General Assembly
shall see that this obligation is met and provide funds for
carrying this out by law will that run afoul of the State
') Boards having the responsibility for it? Do you see a problem
10 with the General Assembly in here being given the specific
'.:)
'z:
11 ~ mandate to make sure this happens rather than the State Board
o
a.
"'
(~9}'''''''' ~I' ~sy.~,
12
: ...
itself?
,,~:;J/
DR. MULLINS: Well, as a statutory making body, it
14 ; basically has that authority already. You don't have to say
<:
'1,
15 ~: it has it. It's got it, but whether it will ever exercise,
'x;
~
1b '~" you know, that kind of authority is yet another question.
z
-0:
!7 ~
MS. GRAHAM: I 'a just like to say you made the
18 statement that you didn't think cutting off the funds was the
19 answer. Well, in my opinion I would have to disagree with you
20 because it seems to me that most anybody that has any common
21 sense in any average school system if they found out their
1) funds were going to be cut off you better believe they'd get in
,,
...:..) there and pitch in and see that the standards were met. At
_)'1.-. least that's my opinion.
MR. GRAHAM: Youmay be giving more credit to some of
the commissioners around the state than they're due because
there are commissioners in the state whose sole objective is
to keep taxes down.
DR. ADAMSON: That's right.
MR. GRAHAM: And they'll tell you that.
6
DR. ADAMSON: And when you get in that particular
situation that suits them fine.
8
MS. GRAHAM: But what about the parents within that
,) school system, wouldn't they have enough pull to see that the
iO standards were met if they were given a mandate saying you've
zCJ
1I 5. got to come up to this level? o "DR. MULLINS: That's what you like to think about
this form of democratic government and it may happen, but unless
: you challenge it to happen it's not going to and I think what
l~ 0 I might have heard Cal say and I think what may have been the '9 ,;< ::>
16 ~ tradition in all of these matters go back to prior to United c '~
; 7 ~ States versus Georgia with the 89 r.ecalcitrant school systems
Ie, that refused to desegregate. They said to the federal government
19 keep your money, we don't need it. The federal government said
.'U fine and to the State Department of Education you don't give them
any state money either. Well, then all of a sudden it was a
'7 different matter. They got in their plans and they became
desegregated. So there you have an example of what happens when
the funds are cut off. Now if you don't cut the funds off
you'll not kndw exactly what's going to happen. The commission
I is not really that much of a-problem to us in education, the boards of education who reflect commission's attitude.
MR. GRAHAM: I meant to say boards of education. I
f couldn't think of the word.
DR. ADAMSON: Of course the other question is
(I legally the Attorney General has not specifically ruled an
opinion that the State Board has the authority to cut off the
s funds. That again would be a court question even if it
L) happened.
10
DR. MULLINS: That may be where we really need to
11 z~'" get a lot of clarification because even when the Attorney
o
0. w
:: :~ General speaks it's nice to hear him, if you can agree with
(l(y(fbt'~~F1~~~\'''-''- ~~ him, that's great; otherwise, just take him to court.
~//
~'
14
DR. PRESSLY: The decision that you referred to,
~
<
is 0 Mr. Mullins, a few minutes ago, isn't that a case that you
'C>
f~
:J
1h ~ could use when you cut off funds? It's been done successfully?
oz.
<:
17 :;
DR. MULLINS: I would think that would be a
!x precedent.
DR. PRESSLY: Precedent, yes. I have no worries
20 about cutting off funds being a valid way to do it. I think
21 that forces us all -- Money talks and if we lost it we'd stir
,1 'around and do something about it seems to me. So I do think we
have the means here.
DR. MULLINS: I think so, but playing devil's
2) I advocate again with attorneys, you know, they can justify on
lc__________________ _ _
j':\(;; 23
the left as easily as they can on the right.
DR. PRESSLY: I know. We've got one over here.
3
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let me see if we can't find out
'+ where we are. I'm a little confused. Are we saying that the
~ Constitution should be modified to be explicit in what the
(, State Board of Education can do in order to enforce the
l adequate education statute? Are we saying that? DR. MULLINS: I'm not saying that and I'm not saying
it not because it may not be necessary. I haven't given it that
10 much thought to make a definitive statement. My off the
shoulder reaction is you wouldn't want to be that definitive
Cl
~.
~ ~";' in the Constitution. Let your statutes in relationship to the u.
responsibility of the Board convey that authority.
DR. ADAMSON: I guess what I was really saying, I
1 I~ 0 answered this question no -- number 2 no, but I said there seems ~ .:r. :J " ~"o,' to be some problem and one of the goals, it appears to us, is <; -"I ~ to provide somewhere down the road either an amendment to the
Constitution or something, some form of relief so that the
'j question of an adequate education being a primary responsibilit~
::1) of the state somebody will have the authority to act and get
'I the job done in an adequate manner.
))
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. We'll take note of that
and hopefully
DR. ADAMSON: Something will come out of it.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Something will come out of it and
reflect that. Okay.
Let's move to item 3, "Should the State be required
to assume a greater responsibility for the financing of public
education?" Mr. Mullins:'
5
DR. MULLINS: I find that a rather difficult question
() to answer yes or no. I believe that the state has the primary
obligation and should provide for the adequate education. Now
~ that is going to require certainly more money if we're talking
') about a greater percentage of the revenue. Are we talking about
more total dollars? You know, I don't exactly know where we're
going there because this comes out in a lot of different
theoretical approaches to the financing of education. If this
case goes through to success and if our present method of
; -I 0>- financing education is declared unconstitutional because of the J' < [
15 ~ enrichment question then we're going to have to come up with
.:;;;
III '~" a new mechanism. There are people who say let's go full state ()
2.
<:
17 ~ funding. Then a committee that met the other day where Cal
and Clark Stevens and Pete Hackney discussed this matter, well, 1~) you know, you're talking about basically one billion additional
20 dollars in order to "equalize" educational opportunity for all
.: ! students in Georgia. Well, I don't think that would be
" ! realistic to think that's going to take place because that
" \ would increase the state's total budget by 1/3. On the other ,, ~r side in the adequate program of education you have a section 25 called district power equalization. Now that program, you know,
: doesn't really answer all the questions even though it moves
toward equalization. It's cost factors. I know it was talked
a little bit. The cost on that, if you used it as a property
tax reducing method it may run a hundred and thirty four to a
hundred and fift.y mi.llion dollars in the 90th percentile level
() ! of funding. But if you didn't reduce taxes and you just put
money on the top up to a certain cap then it would cost you
somewhere between two hundred and twenty-five to twc hundred
and sixty million dollars or so. So when you start talking
about a yes or a no it really is going to get into a problem,
z".
II ..., I think what I heard Clark talk about. How much money we get
; ") ;1':
" 'J is not as much of a problem to us as how do you distribute it
2:
.~!~""o. ~ and there lies, you know, the greatest difficulty and if you
h,; say state doing this are we not then eliminating perhaps
~; Good morning, Senator.
!t,
(Senator Starr entered the room.)
DR. MULLINS: Y'all want to introduce Senator Terrell
Starr for those who don't know him? I don't think anybody jl doesn't know you.
SENATOR STARR: I'm sorry I'm late. I've been on the
long parking line out there.
,)
DR. MULLINS: So really the question in my mind comes
down to the point of where does the local fit into this? Are
we going to look again at increasing required local effort for
the locals, their share of contributions to the education of
I' ,\ \, I 26
their child? Are we going to look for full state funding? I
don't believe that, I believe some part of the latter. So I
guess on that one I'm a fence rider. I don't think that's a
,+ yes or a no answer to this question.
DR. ADAMSON: I answered yes, but I said not the total
cost and I guess in reality I haven't really differed from Jim
in that it's difficult to say to what extent it ought
x to be one way or another. I take it when you say the state
() assume a greater responsibility for the financing of public
10 education you're trying to get at the percentage or the state
L1 7
i 1 :; dollars for education, but I'm not so sure that that can 't be
"'-
I. ~ interpreted that when the state assumes the responsibility that
~ !~~~.s0~) v'~\-,}"._""!,,
~"-
~
it
is
saying
the
state
is
going
to
assure
that
a
local
school
\2,:.:::::./ / 14 district __ that it participate in a fair and equitable manner
l:
15 '~and the state is going to make some provision for equalization L:':":>"
3 of the local systems to do that and if it does that then my
a
T.
~ answer would definitely be yes. ~here would be no fence
I " straddling at all when it comes to that particular part of it.
19
..
:'1
DR. MULLINS: That's a very good statement CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Any comments?
21
DR. MULLINS: If we're not going to question that one
n let me make one other statement. When you start looking at this
whole question of equalization of educational opportunity via
the dollars in the school system it's almost going to require
us to look in a different manner to how we determine how the
dollars are distributed. I'm not coming up with a distribution
system, but I'm saying this, if you look at Mitchell County
J.
-' for an example you may have property rich-income poor folk.
4 If you look at Heard County you may find property rich-income
rich situation because of what happens to be on the land. You
h can have smaller land masses and greater income, more revenue
7 to support local government in these areas as opposed to greater
x land mass with less income to support: the existing students in
9 another county. So it almost requires us to look at each of
10 the 159 counties with 187 school systems as to the income that
L1
11
~Z
1S
available
by
county,
as to the value of the property and the
o
"-
~,
L~ ~ ability of that property to be taxed upon those people's income
';:"~-1
;~:
(\::~=~;h~/,='!"!'.
~
,~,
and
the
cost
of
living
factors
in
each
of
those
counties
and
14 ~ I don't think we've ever really, you know, on a definitive
r
15 ..,.:>", basis looked at these differences to see if we can not 'OJ
It, ~ catagorize various counties to such kinds of factors where one (l z <:
j! ~ county may have to get more because of these problems. We do
l~: ! a lot of things in the state where we can do quick start
Jl) programming and other kinds of things. We have vocational and
technical schools where we're relocating industry, where we're
21 increasing that local property tax base and the state's actions
) ) are going to say more populated areas in doing this have
tendency to skew the income toward those particular areas.
You'll also find local option sales tax will be found more in
these areas. So you will have greater opportunity to provide
1'.\\,/; 28
for local government in certain areas of our state than in
2 others and I think we all recognize that, but I think as we
3 approach this whole question we may have to think of it in
4 terms a little different than how we have thought of it in the
5 past because administratively it's easier just to come out with
h a formula and everybody get some of the same. I would sU9gest
7 ! that probably John's case will make a very strong point to show a flat grant comes from the state with the freezing of the RLE
<) and thereby he has an opportunity then to throw off on the
property tax as enrichment which is causing the differences
between counties abilities to provide educational or equal
educational opportunities to its students.
MS. GREENBERG: Do you feel that a provision should
be stated in the Constitution?
] 5 .~
'-"
.>:
::>
16 ~ 'oz" <
]7 ';;
DR. MULLINS: No. MS. GREENBERG: On question 3. MR. GRAHAM: If it's the state's primary obligation
](i then shouldn't the State of Georgia, as we have tried to define
that, also insure that funds are provided to meet that
2U i obligation?
11 .:-1
DR MULLINS: Doesn't that imply it?
.),
DR. ADAMSON: I think it says so right now. It says
_,.'' it shall be a primary obligation of the state through taxation.
2\
MR. GRAHAM: I'd like to have something a little bit
25 more than OPE which is a bunch of words on paper. That may be
1
PAGE 29
implied there that it's supposed to do it.
~.,'.;
2
roo'
DR. MULLINS: But that's where your statute comes
3 in though, John, and I think this is what the Senator and his
4 collegues are going to have to grapple with with the various
5 resources. But if you shackle them with the mechanism then
h there's no need for that other consideration based upon the
realities of the political environment and the needs and the
~ laws and so forth.
q
MR. GRAHAM: I'm not suggesting that the Constitution
10 ought to tell us what the mechanism is for providing the funds.
'z"
11
I f-.
cr~
think the Constitution ought to say the State of Georgia shall
o
"-
12
I:,:
U
insure
that
there
are
funds
provided
to
maintain
whatever
u.
educational standards it sets, adequate, high quality or whatever
,
\4 i: words you want to use.
~
I
15 .:>
DR. MULLINS: I think it says that when it says shall
I':)
~
:'
Il,
zI;;; "a'
be
provided
for
by
taxation.
z
[7 ~
DR. ADAMSON: The question is taxation at what level?
SENATOR STARR: The courts are going to tell us.
I':
DR. MULLINS: Sir?
2U
SENATOR STAFF: The courts are going to tell us to
21 do this. It's inevitable.
1)
DR. MULLINS: They're going to tell us to do it.
MR. GRAHAM: I wish I was as optimistic as you are
about that.
DR. MULLINS: You've got a lot of cheerleaders.
!':\ '., i< 30
MR. GRAHAM: Never seen both sides of the case
2 pulling for the same thing, only the Attorney General's office
3 is in there fighting.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Are there any other comments on
5 I item 3? Okay.
o
We'll go to item 4, "Should the State be given more
I'
7 Ii authority to set minimum educational standards for private
k schools?".
DR. MULLINS: I'm going to say no. In the
10 Constitution, first of all, the education of its citizens is
"z 11 ~ the compelling interest of the State. I think case law has
o
@C<>. w 12 ~ stated this. I think though that the division of private
~(~~ .~.~ ~ parochial/public schools was assured in the landmark decision
-'......:.-..__.. I
i
14 ~ of Pierce versus the society assistance and I think there you ~ 1:
[) ~ have the right to go whichever way you want. But the state has ~, ex: :::J
10 ~ to say that that particular parallel form of education, private 0 z <
17 '""" education, must at least provide basically what the public
1(; schools provide. I think over in Dekalb County you've got a
It) case looking at that issue and we're going to see many more,
20 but I don't think the Constitution should reflect that because
21 I think you will come in conflict with the constitutional
1 ' cases. _,.,
DR. ADAMSON: I said yes and I disagree with Dr.
24 Mullins on that particular point. I firmly believe that there
should be minimal educational standards for education regardless
r r - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- ..--~~----- -- -- - - - - -
PAGE 31
of whether they come from public or private sector. As for
the carrying out of the setting of those minimums that's a
.\ statutory authority and ought to be put in the statute rather
4 'than in the Constitution, but there should be in my opinion
S The Constitution should require some minimal educational
o standards for public schools and for private schools. Let's
face it when you talk about public -- when you talk about
education if you're just going to set up an educational system
'} and there are not going to be some minimum standards required
lO for it you're not doing much even in the public sector.
l? Z
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: And you also have difficulty
determining whether or not the adequacy is the primary --
primary responsibility has been met.
14 r
>-
DR. ADAMSON: That's right. What are some of the
<'A
I
1\ ~ measures that you put on to determine the pUblic school system
':"J
J('1 'zX_l of the state and its political subdivisions are adequate.
C,
"<-:
:::1:
en
There
have
been
a
lot
of
general
guidelines
that
we
have
used,
I ,- but none of them really apply to private education.
) ')
DR. MULLINS: I think case law has related to
:'.') frivolous equivalency, but when we get into adequacy that's
,
i even a challenge back upon what we're doing in the public -,-, schools. I think there's a difficulty when you try to go into
::::3 the Constitution of the state with that kind of a statement
.:cl emotionally and theoretically and personally. I believe they
_c-- should have the minimum standards. I think that can be handled
i'\;1 32
through the statutes and if the statute then come,s into
~~
-: conflict with the Constitution then it will fall.
3
MS. GRAHAM: I'm a little bit confused. If you want
4 standards for your private schools how are you going to enforce
~ that if you can't enforce them in your public schools?
(,
DR. ADAMSON: That's the whole problem.
MS. GRAHAM: I mean we're back where we started.
DR. ADAMSON: And I guess that thing that I'm trying q to relate is that if we're going to give a private school the
10 authority,as the courts have, to exist to provide education
! 1 ~~ there should be some minimal s set by somebody somewhere to do
()
o
.~
r.~ : it.
(/'(7('?~V~0r~!!"~ ~~
\'\."--- //I
~
MR. GRAHAM: You're talking about licenses.
'--.-------
14:
~
DR. ADAMSON: There's no such thing as a license for
<
I
a private school.
;:,
J() ~ w
MR. GRAHAM: But if you had to do it and you had to
Cl
L <.
17 :; enforce it you do it through a license.
DR. MULLINS: That's the way you do it.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But anybody who wants to start
.)0 ! a school can get a --
21
DR. ADAMSON: In any place he wants to start it in
any conditions. You know, even the question of adequate
restrooms for the kids in a private school is not addressed.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Dr. Pressly, you want to comment
on this based on your experience in this area?
PACE 33
DR. ADAMSON: The State Department can go in and
2 look, but there's not really anything prescribed what meets
~ the minimum that a private school shall have in terms of
4 education, one hour a day, two hours a day, six hours a day?
5 How many days out of the year?
DR. PRESSLY: Let me say that traditionally this has
7 been accomplished through accreditation. Both the Southern
x Association and the State of Georgia have looked over the
q i independent and private -- independent or private schools.
I(!
DR. ADAMSON: What percentage of the private schools
'z"
11 ~ are accredited? You see, when you look at that question
(I c.
"O''
SENATOR STARR: Use the church schools.
DR. ADAMSON: Segregation academies is my terminology
]4 ~ for a lot of them.
'<
1:
1:; ~~
l:) <>: .:>
DR. PRESSLY: I would agree with you that we
lh
OJ
,Z",
obviously
have
some
in
the
state
that
shouldn't
even
exist.
I
C.
Z
:
<.
0:
'D
don't
question
that
at
all,
but
the
ones
that
really
have
any
I ~: respectability about them have attempted
I9
,
DR. ADAMSON: Have done a marvelous job and I don't
2U disagree with those who have done that. Where my disagreement
is is as a means of avoiding some social issue or something
" that they don't want to. They run out and start a school for
ten students or five if they want to.
SENATOR STARR: Say you have a child that goes through
third grade in one of these christian schools and then they want
to come to the public schools, what criteria do you measure
them by? Are they ready for fourth grade? How do you handle
3 that?
4
DR. ADAMSON: Most of the schools use some sort of
5 test and we run into a real problem with this because many of
h the youngsters don't meet
7
SENATOR STARR: I just know scores of these little
H church schools.
DR. ADAMSON: The other side of the coin is many
10 school districts in order to get the kid~ back will just say
'z-'
11 ~ you come back and we'll welcome them with open arms.
o
"'-
12 ~
\/(7;~~~~r'~~
SENATOR STARR: To get those numbers up. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But if you had a clear set of
14 ~ minimum standards then you would have something to measure them
<:: r
I 5 :~: up against.
'"'.;)
J() .~..
DR. ADAMSON: Yeah, but I'm not saying the
c
z
<
J1 ~ Constitution ought to dictate what those minimum standards
are. The Constitution ought to require some minimum standards 19 and then let the statute take over.
20
MR. GRAHAM: It seems to me if the legislature
21 recognized that education is the primary duty of the state they
., )
would look at licensing maybe as -- That would establish some
) : standard.
DR. ADAMSON: That's a political question.
MR. GRAHAM: It is a difficult question.
rr------------- -- ----------. -------
DR. PRESSLY: You do know, for instance, there is
2 obviously, and I'm well aware of this, there's a great loophole
:';'
3 here. But let's say the Georgia Association of Independent 4 Schools, for instance, no school is permitted to be a member 5 of that that doesn't reach the level of accreditation and even
fj above it. So with your accredited schools and the members of the
7 official organizations, as I see it, there's no problem because
'i we've insisted on this all the way. In fact, I will long
Ii
I'
9
,1
1
remember a
time when
down
in
Columbus,
Georgia
we were
having
)U a meeting at this association at a time when some schools were
'.'
JI ~ in the organization that had no blacks within the student
'o"
~.
12 "~' body and we had a great war over whether they were going to
(\~(:..(c,~~),~J c..,..,,~ .~~- be permitted to stay in or not and we ruled them out and I had
,.,:=/); I
J4 >- the embarrassing situation of one of the head masters of one ~;; <l :x:
15 .:> of those schools pointing at me and saying, after it was all
""";OJ
.16 :~ over and the voting was over, you have ruined my school and o l ,t
!;' ~: you are responsible for the fact we've lost accreditation. And
maybe I was, I donlt know, but he had no business in that
19 organization. There was no question in my mind about that
20 because he wasn't living up to the standards of the organi-
21 zation. Now this doesn't even touch the ones that I call
fly-by-nighters.
,-,
_.)
SENATOR STARR: That's the ones that bother me.
.;4
DR. ADAMSON: That's the ones that bothered me too.
DR. PRESSLY: I agree wholeheartedly something needs
'\1
36
to be done.
MS. GREENBERG: Are you saying that for a family
-' to educate its children -- their children it's wr.:)ng or the
4 child is getting an improper education and it's strictly a
5 family situation? If I wanted to teach my children I think
(, I could do probably as good a job as the school system could
do and if we set some sort of guidelines the General Assembly
S shall provide for minimum standards for schools you're really
I
9 :1 preventing a lot of good -I
10
DR. ADAMSON: That's what this Dekalb question --
MS. GREENBERG: But why couldn't we rather than
address the school address the student, say that a student
shall be provided with a good education and there shall be
minimum standards that the students must meet? That way you
get at the student and you allow for all types of schools that
you're sure that the student is going to get the proper
education. So if I want to teach my child in my home
DR. ADAMSON: You don't have that right.
19
MS. GREENBERG: Presently.
20
DR. ADAMSON: That's what this Dekalb County case
21 I that Jim mentioned is all about.
DR. MULLINS: You see you've get the compulsory
,,
--' attendance law and that says you're going to go to school. Now
the state has a compelling interest to see that all of its
citizens are educated adequately. Now the question then comes
down what is adequate and in the situation like you speak of
2 can this be determined adequate and what kind of assurance does
~ the state have that that child is going to receive the
4 education "adequately"? Now the only thing that's given us
5 much guidance here, I think, has been case law and I think
h statutes can be enacted. I think John hit upon it in licensing.
7 The Independent Association of Private Schools set standards
g that can also go into the Southern Association or these other
9 accrediting agencies and meet certain minimal kinds of things.
10 Now whether that's adequate their definition of what it takes
to be accredited that's up to question as well, but at least
it gives some uniformity, some consistency relative to what
they consider a school to be and what should be in that school
and what kind of people are teaching those students.
<:
:r:
15 ~
MS. GREENBERG: That's still not addressing the
"'"::J
16
co
,z.,:
question.
Even if you have a facility and everything is great
a ',:
17 '"" it's not addressing the problem on whether the student is
Ij ":~ getting -- If you set minimum standards at each level --
Il) ;:
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Even if you had the best
20 equipment, the best teachers, required the students to go day
21 and night you could not guarantee that the students themselves
are going to receive and perform at a certain level.
MR. GRAHAM: We're talking about providing opportunity, 24 whether they take the opportunity is another thing.
DR. PRESSLY: I do, though, think we can determine
whether a school is itself doing an adequate job by our testing
program. I have great confidence in the testing program at
3 grade levels. That doesn't mean every child in the school is
4 going to come up. Obviously, some are not going to, but I
5 think you could set a standard. You would have to have a
certain percentage that are reaching such a level because
7 obviously you're going to have some that can't do it no matter
how hard you try and they try, but I know testing programs are
9 not well enough received and you couldn't have put that in as
10 a state obligation. But I personally have a great deal of
confidence in the fact that if you have child if you want to
say that's been educated at home that has reached the fourth
grade level that is reading and working arithmetic at the
eighth grade level then obviously the child is getting an
education. Well, someone could argue he's not getting the
co
u:
::>
16
~
w
group
reaction,
but
if
the
family
then
immediately
took
in
Cl
"l.
<i
17 .~ some other kids and had ten or twelve then they would have
is the group reaction. There are all kinds of ways here -- I
J9 wish we could reach the point where our confidence in the
20 testing was such that we could establish that as a means of
judging.
y)
MR. OWENS: Any testing in any situation should be
the sole criteria for evaluation of accountability of the
2\ ' school, the teacher or the student. It takes a multitude of
2~ different criteria in order to determine what that student
f'\ 't-, 39
really has learned. Many students have difficulty in writing
and expressing themselves in examination, some don't have clear
understanding of taking examinations. I think that's something
that maybe the schools or society as a whole in certain areas
of the country have fallen short on. The aspect of test
taking, although for the lack of something better it's what
we use many times, but I think other things should be added to
it as a means of evaluating that student's school or teachers
t) or etc.
il
JO
DR. MULLINS: Well, educational accountability demands
It "~z some educational criteria by where a child has learned what he
o
0w
12 ~ is taught and in that lies a problem. This goes back to the
;'C;c>,'V""/')1, \
~ j:
,((\.J) )~~"'D
<:~;;//
~
~
state's
responsibilities
versus
those
of
the
local
school
14 ~ system's under the state's authority. If you do not have a
':<r:
]5 ~ curriculum that has been sequenced, that goes to every subject
:"':">'
10 ~ area from grades 1 through 12, I'm not talking about minimal oz <
17 ~ standards, and given to each of the school's teachers in this
Id ! state and by that the supervision of it can be delivered and
19 from this the testing program that will determine whether the
20 child learns will forever be in this test taking argument
21 i because right now our tests are not valid. They don't reflect
anything. We don't have a curriculum and until such time as
you have one that's usable and that is being seen through
supervision to be given to the student then your testing will
forever, you know, be a question of contention. You have two
1
PAGF' 40
terms of val idity you've got to deal with on tests and they -, won't work for you then and for all children, regardless of
:1 race or sex or whatever the other problems that we have across
4 various categories of people it will work if you've got
5 internal validity, that is, the test purports to measure what
() it's supposed to measure and it has external or curricular
-: validity, that is, it reflects what is being taught. If you
,1\ have those two things you can get at those kinds of objective
q problems.
~;
10
DR. PRESSLY: I couldn't agree with you more because
t:l Z
11 ~ for many, many years I worked on the accrediting committee for o "-
12 "~' the Southern Association and so many times we would be
~~ <O_~ .~ ~ accepting or rejecting a schobl and we were looking at things
[4 ~ like the square footage in the classrooms, which I think should
<:
I
15 ~ be looked at, what the faculty's salary was, which obviously
':'""> 16 ~ should be looked at, all of these objective measurements that
c,
2:.
<
17 ~ must be observed and carefully followed through on. I couldn't
JR agree more on and that's what you're sayinge So many things
19 have to be looked at, but in the final analysis I never did
20 think that we paid enough attention to where what happens
21 to the children, where do they arrive in the school and the
22 reason is it's so darn hard to determine and yet I think we
must keep working on that and working on it and refining our 24 methods and our procedures until we can do it because some
25 schools are doing a fantastic job in this and the next school
PAGE 41
in the next county isn't doing nearly as good a job. Both are
accredited, both are getting -- paying the same salaries, same
3 kind of building and doing an entirely different type of -- a
.:j I different job as far as the success for the students are
concerned and this is what I think we need to watch very
b closely. I'm taking us off base here.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I'm going to get us back on base
S i and see if we can't summarize what has been said on item 4.
MR. OWENS: Can we go back to the standards?
10
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think we have a split decision
JI 'o,". in terms of our resource persons. Mr. Mullins has indicated
. 'va
l.~ ~_". that the Constitution should not include statements relative
.\~;~ 3-):':-\.~-(,!~;~
~
I
to minimum
standards
and
Mr.
Adamson
said
yes
and
I
think
that's
14
)-
~
what we
wanted
to get
at
and
I'd
like
to
suggest
we move
on
the
r<
15
-:J IJ
next one.
:":"1
1() '~
~
C,
MR. OWENS: Then we're in abeyance then. One is
1.
1 / :; saying yes and one is saying no.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's okay. They're just here
to give us information.
DR. ADAMSON: You're the one that's got to make the 21 decision. We've got the easy job.
MR. OWENS: I know I've come in late and I know you've
done a lot of discussing, but let me bring up one point for
consideration with reference to the standards of private
schools.
i'A(,J: 42
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That 's in reference to number 4.
-
MR. OWENS: Most of you can reflect the private
3 schools in the past before integration if you go back some 15,
-I 20 years. All of you can -- I'm sorry, ladies, you can't go S back that far, you're too young. But anyway, the private
6 schools were rather sound. Many times people would send their -, children to the private school who could afford it early in R the early days because they felt that they got what we call a
9 very good beginning, a formative foundation and you didn't
10 hear about the standards of private schools or the concerns
\z:J
[1
i=
r::r:
about
them
as
much
until
the
recent
years
and
that
was
when
o,.
12 ~"' all of these 1600 or 2000 private schools have popped up in
~(/~C1~J/SGV~J~d ,-C-""_'''.
.~
v.f.
the
state
as
a
means
of
avoiding
the
integration
process
and
\.
'J
";'
14
~ r;;
that's
where
we
have
reached
the
substandards
in
most
of
the
<: r
IS ,~ private schools that we have. Some of the old est:ablished
\:J
'".:J
!!l '~" ones still have some very good programs putting out very good
o
z -
11 ~ students and everything as such. I look at them sometimes in
l~ a negative sense only because it affects the public schools,
19 the monies, the students, things of that nature and it lowers
20 our ability to operate the public schools and I am public
21 school oriented with all of the schools popping up with no
standards, no guide as to how they're to be set up.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I think Dr. Adamson told
us he had to leave. We would like to get through as many of
these as possible. How much time do we have?
,
l~
. __ ._~
..
. ~_ . .--- .._--_.
. \l-~--~--~~----~~
PAGE 43
I il
DR. ADAMSON = I need to be back in my office in
ii
II
2 ;1 about 10 or 15 minutes. I've got a 10:30 meeting over there.
Ii
J
II
,I
I'll let them cool their heels for a few minutes but not very
I'
4 long.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let's move quickly to item 5.
h It reads, "Should Section VIII of Article VIII on 'Freedom of
7 Association' be retained in the Constitution?". Mr. Mullins?
9
10 no.
,-0
z
DR. MULLINS: Yes. DR. ADAMSON: I don't see any need for it. I said
DR. MULLINS: Why I think it should be in there?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Well, first of all, you understand
the argument that that's been the question that -- I know where
it came from.
IS "'
'u";
DR. MULLINS: I know where it came from, but I just
.:>
J(
~
~
o
read the words and I don't find the words to be offensive to
l
me. If you take the words out you open up other kinds of
p;
I, situations. I just start getting into the whole area of
19 collective bargaining and professional negotiation when I think
20 of this kind of thing coming out.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let me just share something with
you, what we came to an agreement on last time. We said the
statement "Freedom of Association", the statement itself, the
title seemed to be okay, but when you read the paragraph the
paragraph seems to be contradictory of the title and the
paragraph says freedom from compulsory association at all
2 levels of public education shall be preserved inviolate and
3 we said that if it read freedom of association, if you remove
4 the from compulsory -- Is that what we said? What did we say?
5
MR. HILL: We weren't really sure exactly.
6
DR. ADAMSON: I don't know what it means either.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I believe we looked at the time
that was put in here. It was put in here around the
desegregation time and it seemed to me it was a statement that
10 sort of provided for protection for those students.
! 1 ~. ,::,; o .,Cl..
MS. GREENBERG: I did research on this and I have a
.:>,
u
paper which
I
could
hand
out.
It is a result of the Board of
~
Education Decision in 1954. What happened was the General
Assembly provided for a commission to study the school laws
15 .:> in Georgia and the commission, which was called the Sibley
a<::J
::J
It>
"z'
w
Committee,
came
up
with
some
recommendations
to
circumvent
0
7.
17 "'"' the u. S. Supreme Court's decision in Brmm1ey v. Board of
J1) Education and if you'll note on page 1 where it talks about
19 the recommendations, the first recommendation was that the
20 General Assembly propose a constitutional amendment that would
21 forbid compelling the attendance of a child at an integrated
"- school against the will of the parent and provide for
_".' reassignment to another public school or a tuition grant. And .2\ on page 2 you'll note about the middle of the page the
following laws implementing the recommendations of the committee
PAGE 45
on schools were passed in the 1961 session of the General
1 Assembly. Number 3 was Article VIII, Section XIII, Paragraph
3 II, ratified in the general election on November 6, 1962,
states "Freedom from compulsory association at all levels of
s public education shall be preserved inviolate. The General
(c j! Assembly shall by taxation provide for an adequate education
7 ! for the citizens of Georgia." This recommendation and this law
1< is now found in Article VIII, Section VIII, Paragraph I of the
() '76 Constitution which is found on page 69 of your brown
10 copies which is titled Freedom of Association.
~;;
,I I "z
o'"
o.
MR. OWENS: Would that not be in conflict now with
] ) the federal laws?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think so.
J l ;;;
MR. OWENS: If it's in conflict it's out of place
<
:r
I ') ." in the first place.
CJ
'";:)
] (. z'" w
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: In the face of this new
Cl
Z
I -,
<:
<>:
OJ
information do
you
still
think
it
should
be
in?
] ~~,
DR. MULLINS: When you read this without the backgroWld
j ') information, you know, you have to read it for words and even
.'
20 though you had that kind of history bringing it to this
,
i,.
particular point I still think it could very easily be
1 -' ..
interpreted. For example, we had school superintendents and
:~3 school principals several years ago that would penalize
~1:.' ;. teachers for not joining G~when it was GEA before it became "~S GAE, even to the point of saying if you don't join you won't be
f't\ GE 46
rehired. Now that's what you would call compulsory involvement,
",
2 you know, in the educational enterprise and I think that even
3 today under statutes and such there's protections against this,
+ but I guess with this information it does put a different
) perspective, but I think the words will still read what they
() say.
'7
MR. OWENS: Without sounding impertinent, state
K organizations -- and I don't agree with this compulsory joining
q of any association or group, but the state organizations now --
10 I feel that it's better that you join. They don't say you've
...~)
l:
1) '" got to or you're going to be fired.
The point is if you don't
o
", w
t ~ ~ join they'll find a reason next year that maybe you will not
I'\.~S''V--'b''l.~,
I ~,~: o~',m,',!O " be where you were this year. One in particular it's easy to
\""''-~':'/
,'J, I
state
is
the
vocational
group
and
it's
tied
in
and
you're
going
I;; ,~ to join that vocational group and you're going to attend those r,.r:J.
:.0 I,
meetings
and
I'm
not
trying
to
be
impertinent
in
making
the
D
Z
<:
, --1
!.l~
'"'
statement as
such,
but when
you're
a
part
of
a
thing
sometimes
l~) ,: it's just good to be a part of it.
Jl)
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I have one point of order.
:~o
MR. OWENS: I didn't mean to be impertinent in that.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I do want to have comments from
Dr. Adamson on two issues, one is the method of selection of
the State Superintendent of Education and the method of
24 selecting the State Board of Education. Those are the two
issues I didn't want to let him get away before commenting on
,':\(;1<; 47
r~~~~ then we'll come back to this issue. This is item --
il , II
;Iii 3 you?
MS. GRAHAM: You open large cans of worms, don't
4
DR. ADAMSON: Let me just give you quickly the
5 answers that I've put in these for what they're worth. They
6 , don't cost you anything and that may be what they're worth,
7 ! but I'll be glad to give them to you anyway. I said in number
k 5 that that should be no, should not be retained and my reason
) being that this just appears racial motivated to me and that's
10 behind us. Let's get that out of the way and go on with the
II ~ job. o "-
I~ ~
"Should either the State School Superintendent or the
/r;"~V?J-:_I.~\
-~
5 k~))J "". ~.!'. members of the State Board of Education be elected officials?"
'.
/' I I
VI
-~ _/,
\
14 ~ My answer to th~t not necessarily. I definitely believe that
I
is ~ the State Superintendent of Schools should not be an elected
<!)
:'":'
JIJ
,0
.:,
official.
I think he should be an official who is hired to do
o
2.
<'
]7 '; the job and as I have said to the other committee that I met
1II with pertaining to local school boards and superintendents
] 'j if he don't do the job somebody ought to kick his behind out
20 and get somebody who will do the job. That means that if you
elect him he's really not subject --
., ,
SENATOR STARR: That goes for superintendent.
DR. ADAMSON: I serve at his pleasure anyway. I'm
not on the Merit System and the same would go for me also and
associate superintendent. I firmly believe that.
j'.'\CE 48
Now to get to "Should the method of selection of the
2 State Board of Education be changed?". 1 1m not sure that the 3 right answer is going to be to elect board members. I think
they ought to be a policy making body selected in some manner
so as to represent the public and that sort of implies to me
a change from their being appointed by the Governor. 1 1m not
" sure what method that I would go about. Maybe the selection of
8 State Board members could be accomplished in some manner
~ similar to the State Highway
10
DR. MULLINS: Transportation Board.
DR. ADAMSON: Transportation Board or some other
form of it being done by either the people or the representatives
of the people and therefore thatls why I hedge as to whether
or not they should be elected. I am firmly convinced though
15 ~ and still maintain that at the local level the board should be
o
"::">
16 ~ representative of the voting public and should be elected and
c
L
,
< :~
then
hire
a
superintendent
and
at
the
state
level
the
l~ superintendent should be selected by the policy-making body to
lq carry out its policies and whether or not that policy-making
2U body is elected I'm not sure that that I s a way to do it in the
21 State of Georgia. 1 1 m not against it, but 1 1 m not sure thatls
\l the best way to get the job done.
Terrell, have I -- You perked up a minute ago. Have
24 , I answ~red the question?
25
SENATOR STARR: You couldn't have said it any better,
Cal, as far as I'm concerned.
DR. ADAMSON: As far as the composition of the State
:~.
3 Board, the State Board should represent the State of Georgia cl as a whole coming from districts. The congressional district
S method of apportionment as now"'done more or less represents a
h certain number of people and I think that's what the intent
7 of the numbers of the State Board is anyway so that the
>J. constituency out there has somebody that they can go to at that
t) level. So I said no, don't change it.
!O
"
And then, "Should qualifications for members of the
II
CzJ ;
State Board be provided for
in the Constitution?".
No, it
o0:
0w
J2 ~ should represent the population and every individual in the
:.,~~.;';10\
~
\(u.;;..;>1);-="'" ~ state ought to have, you know, the right to serve on the
_.///
- ....--'~
11 ). board. ~ ,~ r
15 .:,
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Including those who represent
::,
16 ! book publishing companies and the Governor? Under the
Cl
z. <:
.', :~ Constitution it allows -- prohibits the Governor and any person
]\ connected with book publishing companies --
1'1
DR. ADAMSON: I do have some strong feeling about
_:() that. I was referring to requiring that they be a college
graduate or that kind of thing is what I was referring to.
)"'
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Associated with any public or
:'3 private
DR. ADAMSON: I would agree with that. Vickie, I'll
give you that and you can have them.
L'AU': 50
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: On behalf of the committee,
2 doctor, we want to say thank you.
3 :1
DR. ADAMSON: Thank you for letting me come. I
4 enjoyed it very much. I appreciate the opportunity to be here.
5
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Now we can go back to item 5. I
o I think we've probably done enough on that at this point.
DR. MULLINS: I concluded my statement on it this
3 way. With what Vickie gave us, this kind of research background,
9 it would appear that that particular item in our Constitution
10 could be an affront to a great number of our citizens. From that
standpoint, I would have no problem having this infor.mation in
hand to say, you know, remove it and I think through the First
Amendment we have freedom of association anyway. So I think
if that's what y'all were hoping to get around to you've got
15 ~ it under the United States Constitution.
'.0
:':">
16 ~
MR. GRAHAM: We're talking there in that section --
"z
)7
< ~
about
the
first
sentence
of
that
section
--
the
second
sentence~
Ix I don't know how it really connects up.
19
DR. MULLINS: Only from this we begin to see --
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It means that they'll provide
21 the monies.
MR. GRAHAM: But it says provided by taxation. It
_, .,' goes back to what you said about meeting the primary obligation.
,,
.."
DR. MULLINS: There's no need for that
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Let' s now get Dr. Mullins'
PAGE 51
thoughts on 6.
2
DR. MULLINS: I agree with Cal on that one entirely.
~ I think the State School Superintendent should be appointed.
4 I believe that the State Board of Education should be elected
S or selected according to some other method than presently being
() done. On that latter point, the method that I would lean
7 toward more than any other would be the one that Washington
R uses and this is where they have caucuses of the local Boards
(l of Education in that congressional district to choose their
10 representative to the State Board. Now the reason I like that ..:.....
;t
our present State Board is composed of a fine group of people
who deliberate very hard and diligently upon the problems,
however, traditionally these people have deliberated in
l'l ;: Atlanta. Very few of the constituents of education know who
~
<
1:
1'; ,~, their particular State Board representative is. They all know ,~ u: :=>
i() '~"' who the senators are, they know who the representatives are, c z.
j7 ~ they know who the Governor is, they know who the commissioners are, they know who the local board is, but they don't know
I':) ~ the State Board person and they're going to be given more
20 i guidance in education through the decisions of the State Board
_)I' than they are in the local board and therefore it could be that
they need to be more reflective of those people. Now that also
231 goes into the next part of the question, I believe, that the 24 local superintendent should be appointed by an elected local
Board of Education. If you have local boards elected and
caucusing to select their State Board the people have direct
involvement. It also ties in with what Cal was saying about
not having to go into a great listing of qualifications for
board members because when you have these people who had been
selected by the local folks to lead their educational
enterprise they're going to try to select people as a group
that also reflect those attitudes toward excellence, if you
want to call it that, in education and we're going to get a
better selection. I don't mean a better selection of persons,
but a better process via the selection.
MR. HILL: The local system subcommittee is leaning
toward leaving the local boards elected or appointed as they
are on the effective date of this Constitution and thereafter
the local people could change them by referendum if they
15 ~ wanted to. Would you still feel this would work if we had some
L"
':";,
16 ~ boards elected and some boards still appointed?
oz
~:
17 ~
DR. MULLINS: I think it could still work. You're
18 going to still be dealing with citizens of Georgia who are
19 deliberating on the educational question and therefore I think
20 they can better select the person that they feel should
21 represent their particular congressional district on the State
22 Board making those larger policy decisions. If you go to an
~-' elected State Board person I think you get into many different
~4 problems. I don't think the problems are expense. I just
there's a problem in selection and I think the same thing
PAGE 53
would reflect over to regents. You need an individual who is
2 there for the purpose of deliberating on the matters of
3 education and has a dedication to that kind of deliberation as
4 opposed to somebody who just wants to hold down taxes.
MS. GRAHAM: Could I challenge you there. We, as
you know, have been through this locally in our county and I
7 was kind of suprised this morning when everybody kept talking
8 about local school board members even wanting to keep taxes
9 down. I guess that's because my mind doesn't run on that
10 track, but you still have to remember somewhere along the line
"z
J!
l-
oe<
you've got to keep some accountability at your state level and
0-
w
0:
.U..
the
Select Committee
has
already
said we will
never
go
for
both
of these, the superintendent and the State School Board, being
14 ~ appointed. That was in the paper. I gave you the article.
<l
r
15 ~
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But I think it was not the method
1() ~ of appointment for the School Board was not ever clearly CI z. <
" :ii defined, not in the manner in which Dr. Mullins has defined it.
JI you?
MS. GRAHAM: Do you still have the article I gave
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The newspaper clipping, yes.
21
DR. MULLINS: I don't know what the Select Committee
11 said, but the general feeling -- I think you would find over
most categories of people, legislature, Governor and others --
I think the Governor, Terrell, would be quite willing to have
the State Board appointed and let them appoint the Superintendent.
I'A(~E 54
I think on the other hand the legislature as a whole may not , be as willing to give that concession. I think the legislature
3 might be willing to select by legislative caucus as they do
4 I on the Transportation~oard. I don't think the Governor would
5 like that because either one of the two tend to put sort of a
6 plenary control implied in either the executive branch or the , legislative branch. So I think both of those two things may
~ not find adequate support.
9
DR. PRESSLY: Describe for me how the Highway Board
10 is set up.
11 ~
DR. MULLINS: I think probably Terrell could tell
o
w"-
12 ~ us better.
(~~o._.~ ~
SENATOR STARR. Each district -- You have ten
,~
14 ~ districts. Any representative or senator that touches that
r<
15 '0 district, like you've got a piece of the pie, they all in
u'':>:
::>
16
zr.o waz
caucus
vote and
they
select by process
of
elimination and
<:
i7 ''"" agree on someone. It's a difficult process. I know in
selecting our Highway Board member last time we met a half a
19 dozen times and finally selected a person, Jim, who wasn't even 2() considered initially because we had a stalemate. We had one
from Clayton County that we wanted and one from Haralson County
,", that they wanted and we finally agreed on Young Longino from .,_-,' Fairburn, but it was a good compromise It worked out .. We've
.,..., kicked this around a lot and everybody knows how I feel about
it. I can't conceive still of a person running for the State
Board of Education districtwide. It's just unthinkable, but
"
2 by the same token I like maybe a combination of what Jim is
3 saying, have your local board members involved in a caucus,
4 then recommending' three names maybe to the Governor who would
:1 appoint or confinm by the Senate or recommending three names
(, to the caucus to be elected like we do the Highway Board
"' members. That would get the parties involved in a pretty good
1\ cross section process. That might be the best answer.
C)
DR. MULLINS: That is good. I like that.
J()
SENATOR STARR: Have the local districts recommend
\:J
II Z~ to us in a caucus where we select -- like we select the Highway
o
Q.
w
12 ~ Board, but only have three names maybe to go from going in.
"",?Y.ft(J.,
,~
((~~j))'J 000""'0 ~ That process has got a lot of merit to me.
''-".':/:~/
~I
J4 ~
DR. PRESSLY: That sounds good.
!;;
<
J:
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Finish your statement.
'C-)"::
;;J
16 ~
MS. GRAHAM: Another thing I wanted to add is that
,~
a
0:
17 ~ locally we kept getting comments like well, if you have an
IX elected school board you won't get anybody qualified to run.
!(l Well, I'm here to tell you that in my district I have an
."2U opponent wi thin my party and there are two opponents in the
2l other party. So that's four people who are running for this
one district school board post. We have a doctor, an attorney
an educator.
SENATOR STARR: That don't necessarily fit all
,~, situations.
PACE 56
MS. GRAHAM: We have 18 people in Glynn County who
2 are running for five school board posts.
3
SENATOR STARR: That's great, but in a lot of
4 counties you've got to beg somebody to run.
DR. MULLINS: That's true.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Well, I think the difference
7 where we are now is that we've gone a little bit further in
R defining how -- what the process might take place that would
9 involve the people who involve the representation of the
1U people of Georgia and they would have some -- At least their
"z
11 ~ interest through the process would be somewhat protected as
...o
0..
12 ~ opposed to the Governor appointing directly both the board and
/;/~?'~~\
:.
. k. ..~ \,.Q,'J"),~)Jr~!"O
oJ
V1
the
superintendent.
,
J,~ "
j--
on
MS. GRAHAM: I'm not saying that it can't work. I'm
oC T
15 ~ just saying I think the people of Georgia are going to demand
'"::>
ii, 3 some type of accountability and when you start having both c.z.
17 ~ appointed then I think that's a problem.
18
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Do you think most people in
19 Georgia understand that there's basically no accountability
for the State Superintendent? I don't think they know that.
21
MR. OWENS: Most people don't understand that. I
22 I don't think -- Most don't even understand what the State
Superintendent's responsibilities should be as they have set
up now and as someone mentioned a few minutes ago, most of them
do not know the members of the board. They know the St.ate
PAGE; 57
Superintendent, who he is, his name. They do not know the
:,;.
.~, members of the board, but if they were elected they would know
3 the members of the board. You see, that's where that
4 accountability idea comes up again, the one or the other. I :; don't think it's been a problem with us as to whether or not
6 the State Superintendent should be elected or appointed. I
7 think right off we said no problem with that. Where we have
R , had problems trying to bring things together is what or how
; should we deal with the members of the board and I know that's
10 what we're discussing now.
l'
Z
I I i-
0'
DR. MULLINS: Terrell said -- What Senator Starr said
i:)
c'"
~
l' ~ to me makes more sense than anything I've heard thus far to
be very honest with you because it does marry all of the
j "1
>~
~~
various groups
together that should be involved in that
I
:5 ~ process and you're not eliminating anyone and you do have .:J 'C"l
!() a~ accountability.
z.
<0:
1'7 ::;
MR. HILL: Under the Washington plan are the
is nominees limited to the members of the boards themselves or
are they able to go out
DR. MULLINS: No, no, they can select --
MR. HILL: Anybody, okay.
DR. MULLINS: Start delineating those who are
available and you run into other kinds of problems.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Who puts forth the person's
name? If I wanted to run I'd have to get somebody on one of
those boards to sponser me?
2
DR. MULLINS: Let's put it this way, you're going to
-' have to get your name in some way. You may walk in yourself
4 and give it, but it's got to get in.
SENATOR STARR: You can get anybody to put your
() name in. You submit the name and they vote this one, that one,
7 I get a concensus of the local delegation, you branch out and
k you start getting enough support to get your man.
MR. HILL: How many members are there in a typical
ji) congressional district? How many members of a board of
\ I education?
l' J
; ~~J~~),f~"
DR. MULLINS: Ten districts in 159 counties. MS. GREENBERG: The Washington state plan that he's
14. >-- referring to says the State Board of Education comprises 14 '"
! ...; members, two from each of the seven congressional districts '-
-'
j ; of the state elected by members of Boards of Directors of
;~
1.
17
<,
y
school districts within their respective congressional
~~ districts.
Ii
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: They also have to have the
2() election based on the majority of the persons who are present, .,. but you also have to have a majority of the School Board ,,
members present.
MR. HILL: But my question is how large is this
caucus going to be? Is it 150, 200 people that will be getting
together?
- - - - 11---~----
I I!II
DR. MULLINS: The mechanism by which that's carried
:1
2 :1 out, I don't think the Constitution would relate to. I think
3 you'd handle that --
MR. HILL: No, I just wondered from a practical
standpoint.
"
SENATOR STARR: Well, you're talking about five to
seven members in each county. How many are on your board?
MS. GRAHAM: Ten.
')
SENATOR 'STARR: Normally in a district you would have
10 15 counties. You might have --
."
2
II Z
DR. MULLINS: Seventy-five to a hundred and fifty
I')
u.
"'
1.: ::
(;:<--C.,V--1,i,,:'"1\. ~\ e""",,. :~
,,'-bJ))1--- u
\,:...."=~'~/_/
VI
members.
SENATOR STARR:
You could have a right sizable --
?: In selecting the Highway Board we'll have 35 to 40 members
<..
r.:
I c. .~ involved in the selection of each Highway Board member because
".c
::>
jn ~ you'll have that many representatives and senators that will o z
I 7 :"";. touch it in some fashion. Then we have a minimum requirement
j,\'; :: that have to be there present and voting to carry and then
19 I the majority holds of course. So it could get a bit unwieldy
:W like you I re saying.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Who runs it in the State of
Washington? Does -- Is the superintendent the one that goes
to the meeting and actually manages this process? I couldn't
pick that up from reading it. Did anybody find out who
manages the process?
1':\(;1 60
DR. MULLINS: No, I don't know, but you see, just , Ii like it was indicated, you have maybe 15 school systems within 3 a district. Assume that's so, then what you could do is each 4 school board would have one vote but they would do their own :. caucus about the person they wanted to support them. Then you
() could limit --
7
SENATOR STARR: That would narrow it down.
MR. HILL: And if there were only three that's what
9 they're going to be coming up with, three.
lU
DR. PRESSLY: Where will the three names go?
''':)
z II ....
'",o,,,-
SENATOR STARR: Well, I was just suggesting off the
~
1.' : top of my head that you would submit those either to the
,(\/\t/~JC:l"f.:-6~l_t".:0'Jt,\J\~)c'--un...o
~ 3
~
Governor
or
the
General
Assembly.
All the components are
14 >- confirmed by the senate and they might be sent to a district !;~ < ~
1S ~ caucus much like we elect our present Highway Board members,
,~
'""J 16 ~ those three names and then that caucus would in turn select
Czl
<:
17 ~ from those three.
18
DR. MULLINS: I like that.
it)
SENATOR STARR: That's a pretty good possibility if
20 we don't want to go to the election process.
21
MS. GRAHAM: I guess I'll go to my grave fighting
that issue. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Well, you have stronq support
from Mr. Vann.
L _ _,
MS. GRAHAM: Is that a guarantee?
,~__.. '----
I'A(;E 61
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: From the last meeting he was
very strong on this.
MS. GRAHAM: Have you got some support back there?
4
MR. OWENS: I'm looking and listening to these other
alternatives that they're bringing up. I have not been
() convinced that we are going weaken the quality of the State
7 Board with an election. Now in any kind of selection or
election or appointing of people to things there can always o be some problems of quality or whatever and I can see how some
10 persons with money and popularity and yet having no good feel
for the education can get elected, but we still have those
people out there and I believe that in most cases they make
some pretty good decisions.
DR. PRESSLY: I do too, but I just don't believe you
I ~l' could get anybody to run districtwide for a job that pays
,-'
'::">
,n
j [, 3 absolutely nothing.
o
z:
<:
l~:
MS. GRAHAM: We're going to change that.
SENATOR STARR: Unless they have an ulterior motive.
J)
DR. PRESSLY: Unless they have an ulterior motive.
MR. OWENS: Some have a motive of wanting to serve.
MS. GRAHAM: Well, there's a reason the people want
to serve on the State Board of Education. For one thing, it
keeps them informed about what is going on in the State of
Georgia as far as education is concerned and another is that \ ~, there are & lot of other fringe benefits and that is that many
1 I times the State Board members get to travel like to Washington,
I
II
2 D.C. and places like that at the state's expense.
3
SENATOR STARR: That won't fly.
MS. GRAHAM: Well, like one of our local board
members is appointed and the person made the statement that
he or she, I don't want to say which, anyway, the board member
7 had really enjoyed serving on the local board because she had
8 been able to travel a lot.
qI
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: She now.
10
DR. MULLINS: Isn't the issue though, Miriam, not
lz?
11
;::
t:t.
so much what the benefits are but what the local
constituents
C'
>
i 2 ~~ are going to be benefited by that representative on the State
(~\ ~.: ~)-- enn",.~ Board?
'---
i
14 >
MS. GRAHAM: You're right.
v,~.
<
r
15 ,',
DR. MULLINS: If you've got those local boards having
.:J
":>
i ()
,cn L w
direct
input
as
to
that
individual
who's
going
to
represent
0
Z
<
17
<Y-
en
them not only are they going to
feel
ownership
in that~ member
IN but that member is going to feel obligation to, you know, his
19 or her constituents in that district. There will be ~ greater
20 tie between the State Board member and the constituents within
21 the congressional district as a result of such a process. An
22 I election may not do that for you because it depends on where
,~.
.
'
)
the population within that district is located can play parts
as to where they may be more obligated as to other areas of
that district.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Under this provision, this
appointment for full term -- How -- If they're elected you
; could recall them, but under this process if you make a bad
4 decision is there any way to correct it? Say on Highway
5 Commission, how do you correct a bad decision?
SENATOR STARR: Well, they're appointed for a certain
term and of course you could have a recall provision just like
you would on any other official, I'm sure, but that's something
9 we'd just have to work out mechanically.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I was wondering if we could bring
'z"
that in to sort of ease the concern.
SENATOR STARR: How would you recall them right now?
MS. GRAHAM: Well, at least you have the option of
putting them out of office.
., ]') 0
DR. MULLINS: If they were elected and you recall
.::">
ji;
n Z.
on
the
elective
situation
you
can't
recall
a
State
Board member
z"
<
17 <e>n' because they're appointed and confirmed.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's what I was asking. I know
under the present system you can't do that, but under the
20 system through the caucus mechanism would there be any way
Could the caucus recall them?
DR. MULLINS: Is it necessary because really we can't,
, ,.
any of us, guarantee that our decisions are inviolate. That's
the nature of the human being, but what you do is within your
mechanism you set up your length of service. Personally, I
PACE 64
don't think you should have a seven year term. I think it
2 should be four.
l
SENATOR STARR: I agree. I think a four y~ar term
"I would give you that accountability.
S
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We haven't even raised that as
() an issue and I think we ought to put that doWn as somethihg we
7 ought to be concerned about and that is the length of term.
,\
SENATOR STARR: A four year term -- Ms. Graham, we
'! did talk about that at one of our first meetings, didn't we?
10
MR. OWENS: The idea you brought up a few minutes
II ~"z ago of maybe the individual boards causussing or forming a
<,:.>
J.~ "~' causus of themselves and then from that maybe they have one
~~~ ~ /~~l~\,
~
......, vote when they all come together. that cuts out some of the
14 ,. cumbersome ideas -- cumbersomeness of the size. But I want to
..:
J:
15 ~ add something else to that. I'd hate to put all of that -'o-X" :>
16 :~:: Although some other states or groups, boards of education, z <
!7 ~ state groups, have the idea, I'd hate to put all of that
!8 !I!I responsibility on the school boards. I think we need to move 19 out into other areas and pick up people. For example, all
20 that's right in the boards of education, right at that crust
21 top area without touching base with maybe some of the other
" educators in other areas.
",,:,_,,
SENATOR STARR: Odell, don't you think by the process
Ii
2,l of selecting people they would do that? For instance, as it
2~ presently works if there's going to be a state board member
PAGE 65
Ir------------ ---.._--~
I il appointed the Governor's office checks with members of the
General Assembly and the whole congressional district to get
a sense of opinion on it. I would think if our local board
members were going to be selected the person to nominate to
the state senate caucus or the state house and senate combined
() i' caucus for purposes of selection of the board they would check
with the superintendent, they would check with other county
officials and they would check with the PTA groups, they would
') check with GAE to make sure they got someone really dedicated
I(I to education before they would recommend that person. You
,? 7-
11 ~ want to always get a good selection process, but you're touching o o.
j 2 ~ a lot of possibilities.
':SV-t:h ~\
=;~
r----- L:'...J; ) u ;. ."".' ' . ,",-,) ClllTtfllO ;:;
\l
MS. GRAHAM: I have no hang-ups with the present
\'
/ /i
if;
~.~.:/ /
14 ~ State School Board myself. I mean, I think many of them are
<:
I
15 ., doing a very good job and to me this is not the issue, but I
,0
':":>
::,
~U
7.
'a"
am
thinking
about
the
citizens
of
Georgia
and
I
don't
think
z
they're going to go along with both of them being appointed.
I don't care what procedure you use and we do have to be 19 realistic. That's why we're here.
20
MR. GRAHAM: I don't call what Dr. Mullins has
.21 suggested as appointed. It may be quasi-elected, but it's not
, appointed.
23
MS. GRAHAM: But that school board member is still
24 not "elected".
DR. PRESSLY: It's mighty close to election. It's a
quasi-election.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think if we could get some
3 conCensus here. Somebody is going to have to do some
4 education We're going to have to sell it to the public and
5 I think when the public finds out that we have a superintendent
6 now who can lido what he or she wants to do with no accountability
7 to the board", the board can't fire him or her, that would
cause me much concern if I was an average citizen out there
just finding out for the first time.
10
SENATOR STARR: The alternative might be better.
"7.
11
MS. GRAHAM: Well, that's a good selling point.
MR. HILL: Well, of course this will always be an
option available to provide for election of the school board
members. I mean everyone knows that's one option. So the
beauty of this proposal is it really. is a halfway point
!:J
~
~
1()
J~
!u
between what was originally proposed,
which
is
appointed
by
"i:.
<
)7 ~ the Governor, or election. It really is a compromise
position so it would be a good thing to propose at least to
19 have down for people to react to and always you can fall back
20 on the election if it's absolutely necessary.
2\
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I think we've covered the
Decision Agenda and I'd like to express on behalf of the , ,, committee appreciation to Dr. Mullins for his contributions.
24 Also, I'd like to remind us on the 28th we're going to be
hearing from Dr. McDaniel and I also would like to request that
maybe, let's say at the end of the 28th meeting let's see how
4 close we can get to a concensus as a committee on these items.
So I would like you to give some serious thought -- July 28th
at 9:00, we're going to be meeting with Mr. Vann who has some
information he wants to share with us. At 9:45 we're going to
~ meeting with Dr. McDaniel.
q
MR. OWENS: July 28th?
JO
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Yes. I'm sorry, you weren't here 41
I; ,- We have two more meetings scheduled as of now: July 28, 9 :00,
12 u and that may be all day so keep your schedule open, and on the--
f, r\~U.SE;Y~.:!".J\4/\\/IJ-'='~'~,:; August 18th.
_-_ _' ~,~_~./'/ ",// ..... ..
I, .r. _~
MR. OWENS: We will be dealing with these questions?
!;;
<;
T
J:; .~
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: With Dr. McDaniel on the 28th.
.~
:'"-,'
:., .'"~ However, after we finish that I do want to see how close we can
az
<i
~ get in terms of concensus of this committee on these issues
,. because that will allow us to begin to do some preliminary
1'.1 drafting work for the August 18th meeting.
MR. OWENS: May I ask a question? The ideas that you
21 had with reference to the structure of possible selection or
using the term quasi-election process of the board members,
could we get that sort of structured?
'.1
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think it's a good idea. I
think that we talked about, and I would like to ask the staff
to do this, the last time we summarized several alternatives
and the superintendent could be elected, the board could be
3 elected; the superintendent could be appointed, the board could
4 be appointed; the superintendent could be appointed by the
board or appointed by the Governor, the board could be appointed
(1 by the Governor or by the legislative district method or by
local elected school board method and I think it would be
instructive to us if we had sort of a summary of those
variations. Is that asking too much?
il)
MR. HILL: We'll be happy to put together just a
z
it", summary of what the options are. I don't want to draft these
o
0.-
;.,,~cYlid\
,'"~' u
for each of these proposals.
I think all we have to do first
~.
.'I'\r.I~E;-"\)\.)).'/"-"-",-. :: is to decide which way it's going to go. We can certainly
\<~- j /
'
1, describe -- And based on the meeting today, we have much more
1; of an idea what that last option is, the local selection
process. So we can describe that. We'll put it together to
,.
:r talk from at the meeting.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could you put it together and
Ii mail it out so that we would have to chance to read it?
"
MR. HILL: Yeah. Sure, we'll send that out with the
notice of the next meeting since there are a number of people
" who weren't here, plus Mr. Vann from the Board of Education
will be responding to this on behalf of the Board of Education
at the next meeting on the 28th as well as the State School
Superintendent, Tom Vann, who is a member of this committee and
1' ..:\CE 69
a member of the Board of Education. Did you want to set up
the September meeting or would you rather wait till later?
..r ~
CHAI~ MEREDITH: Let I s wait until the 28th and ask everybody to look at your calendar for September or bring
your calendar with you so we can pin down an appropriate date.
Okay. Thank you so much.
f
Ii
,
(Whereupon, the meeting was adjourned at 11:03 a.m.)
;"1
;
!!
l' ! ",' ::;
70 C E R T I F I CAT E I, Peggy J. Warren, CVR-CM, CCR A-171, do hereby certify that the foregoing 69 pages of transcript of represent a true and accurate record of the events which transpired at the time and place set out above.
"
Peggy J. Warren, CVR-CM, CCR A-i7I
II)
(.,l
15 ,",
::'0
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on July 16, 1980
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7-16-80
Proceedings. pp. 3-6
SECTION I: PUBLIC EDUCATION
Paragraph I:
Public education; free public education prior to college or postsecondary level; support by taxation. pp. 6-46
(Private schools and freedom of association. pp. 30-46, 50.)
SECTIONS II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, and III: STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT. pp. 46-66
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
..,
z 11 i=
@;;.'lo1"... ! 14 lV> <t :I: 15 ..:.>, '::"> 16 .~.. c Z <t 17 ~ 18
19
20
21
22 23 24
25
PAGE 1
STATE OF GEORGIA SELECT COMMITTEE
ON CONSITITUTIONAL REVISION COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII SUBCOMMITTEE ON BOARD OF REGENTS, ARTICLE VIII
Room 401a State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia Thursday, July 17, 1980 1:30 p.m.
PRESENT vJERE:
2
COMHITTEE MEMBERS:
3
MRS. ANNE T. HAGER, CHAIRMAN
F. SIBLEY BRYAN
4
DR. ALONZO CRn1
5
SELECT COl1MITTEE STAFF:
6
l1ELVIN HILL
MIKE HENRY
7
EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT COUNCIL:
8
DR. JIM MULLINS
9
10
"z
11 I-
.'lo".l..
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 ~ I'" J: 15 .:> "'::"> 16 'z" 0z 17 ''""
Ig
19
20 21 22 23 24 25
PAGE l(a) ---
PAGE 2
PRO C E E DIN G S
2
1:30 p.m.
3
ANNE HAGER: I would introduce, but I guess we know
4 each other by this time. Mr. Hill suggested that we work from
5 this decision agenda and I hope all of you brought that with
6 you today. It was in the mail and I also hope you had a chance
7 to review the comments from the last meeting that were mailed
8 out--the big thick packet there. Doctor Friedman, and--Did you
9 get a chance to look through that?
10
JIM MULLINS: Not really.
t:I
Z
11 l-
e."o.<".
ANNr: HAGER: OKay. ~"1ell, I think first what we will
@ . ~~; do is to hear your comments on this agenda, if you want to run down that. We'll listen td you and after that we will discuss
! 14 I- it among ourselves. So we will give you the floor.
<II
:I:
15 .:>
JU1 HULLINS: Oh, that's nice. I always like to have
t:I
e<
~
16 .~.. somebody else so you've got somebody else to argue with .
Q
Z
17 ~
MEL HILL: ~\fell, you may have. You may have somebody
18 else, Henry Neel from the Board of-- may come by.
19
JIM MULLINS: Oh, Henry is a good man. Well, just
20 going down--this one is not quite as difficult as the one we
21 had the other day, at least from my perspective. First of all,
22 when you talk about shoulp the composition of the Board of Re-
23 gents be changed and I'm going to give you my opinion and the
24 opinion of my office and we say no. If you want me to clarify 25 on those thin~s I will do so but, I think a response there if
PAGE 3
you're not interested in clarification we will just go to the
2 next one.
3
ANNE HAGER: It has worked ,,,'ell in other 'words?
4
JIB HULLINS: I think it has.
5
ANNE HAGER: No problems?
6
JIM MULLINS: I think it has. In the unique nature
7 of the Regents and their mission to me declares that this com-
8 position is quite adequate. I don't know their feelings, but I
9 haven't heard them arp;ue too much about that. "Should the
10 method of selection of the members of the Board of Regents be
11
z"
i=
o..'"....
changed?"
And I don't feel th8.t should be done either.
I
@ ; j think the methods by 'VJhich they're operating now is sufficient. However, in three, "Should the term of tIle members of
14 ~ the Board of Regents be changed?" Here ,vllen ,'Ie are thinking in 1;; < :I:
15 olI this age of accountability and you have a seven term year of of-
"'":::I
16 .~.. fice thet these people are occupying and I think perhaps the Q Z <
17 :; background of that was Governors serve for four years and if he
18 appoints a regent who is going to be in there for seven years
19 this would have a tendency to at least moderate the influence,
20 you know, on those Regents in their decision making over the
21 university system. Four years, however, would appear in line
22 "lith ,,,hat we have our elected officials and also in line with
23 ,vhat some other Boards are serving. It would give an opportunity for 8.
24 Governor ';:J1:1.o does not succeed himself, the neoN' one CQITling in, to review the
25 accountability decisions of those particular Regents and if in
PAGE 4
fact they are doing a fine job I'm sure that they might find
2 themselves reappointed as we have found in our State Board on
3 numerous occasions as we have gone from one Governor to another
4 So, four years, at least to me seems to be responsive using as
5 the base line of reason accountability. You might have one who
6 is excellent. You may want to keep him on for fourteen, fiftee
7 years. That's fine. That's up to the Governor and the analy-
8 sis of that persons' contribution. I feel that if you keep
9 him in seven and guarantee him seven we have little way of doin
10 much with him until the closure of that service time.
Czl
11 ~
ANNE HAGER: Let me go back and comment on just two
o
0-
12 ~and three if it is appropriate. I guess it is just to discuss
(~) ~ ~ r ~ it at this time. What,and I guess I direct this to you Mel,
14 ~What are the, Melvin--What did the other committee do about the
':-"<r
15 ~ selection and the term of office? There was some talk about
~
::>
16 '~" maybe making the Boards the same.
I'm not saying we have to, but
z -<
17 : have the other committees?
18
MELVIN HILL: They haven't made any decisions. The
19 other committee hasn't made any decisions about whether to
20 change it. They seem to be leaning toward leaving the composi-
21 tion and method of selection--iJo, no the composition ,)f the pre-
22 sent State Board of Education the same. But, the method of se-
23 lection is really under--
24
ANNE HAGER: Their still looking at that?
25
MELVIN HILL: Consideration.
PAGE 5
ANNE HAGER: How about the term of office? Have they
2 shortened that? Have they talked about making it, like four year
3 instead of seven? 'Cause the Board of Education is seven years 4 too; isn't it?
5
~IM MULLINS: That's correct.
6
HELVIN HILL: They haven't really discussed that.
7
VICKI GREENBERG: But it is your opinion about the ter
8 of office of the State Board?
9
JIM MULLINS: Four years.
10
VICKI GREENBERG: You feel that they should conform?
CzI 11 ...
.'o."....
ANNE HAGER: Both of them should. Do you feel that it
~ 12 ~ should be comformative between the two Boards: the Board of
(@)r~ Regents and the Board of Education?
14 ~ t;;
JIM MULLINS: No. I think you've got two different
<t :I:
15 .:> animals, even in how they receive money. One is line itemed, CI '~"
16 ~... has very close scrutiny, has a very accountable mechanism Q
Z <t
17 : through the appropriations process by which this is looked at.
18 One of your questions in here later, requires to the lump SUM.
19 you know, item. Because of the unique nature and I'm going a-
20 head of myself but because of the unique nature of the univer21 sity systems that programs, for example on the graduate level 22 requires some intricate and expensive equipment, whereas when 23 you get into the public school system generally you're not face 24 with that type of a problem. So to line item, as an example a 25 university system you know it's not as feasible because of the
PAGE 6
different missions of the various universities; colleges, jun-
2 ior colleges and other post secondary institutions under their
3 control. So, I think with those unique funding differences,
4 that it has an effect back to say what might be well for the
5 State Board of Education doesn't necessarily relate to what
6 might be best for the Regents. So, if that makes any sense at
7 all, I would feel that compositions shouldn't be similar becaus
8 I don't think their ITlissions are similar.
9
MIKE HENRY: Are these terms staggered?
10
JIM MULLINS: Sir?
Czl
11 i=
.'"o".".
MIKE HENRY: Are the terms staggered?
~ 12 ~
JIM MULLINS: They were staggered, yes and are stag-
~ri gered.
If you changed anything of that nature you do just as
! 14 .... the Constitution presently calls for . If you're going into a
'z"
15 .:. four year term you don't want it staggered then you'll bring
Cl
'"::l
16
~...
Q
people
in
as
their
present terms expire "and then keep
them
under
four
Z
17 : which would in all probability, I haven't looked at the permen-
18 btions, but I would guess it would continue to stagger it.
19
ANNE HAGER: Okay.
20
JIM HULLINS: All right. On the Chancellor's position
21 in the Consitution I do not feel that he should be included as 22 a Constitional officer. I think that he is appointed by the 23 Regents. lIe is their Administrative head, he is that person 24 who is the Chief Administratoc of the Regent system. To give
25 him Constitutional authority as far as I'm concerned doesn't
PAGE 7
make good sense anymore than I think the State School Superten-
2 dent should be in that guise.
3
N-mE HAGER: Something that I was curious--I real de-
4 finition, I don't think we've had it between the chairman of
5 the Board of Regents and the Chancellor, their two jobs. They're-
6 not the same person, right?
7
JIM MULLINS: Oh no. One is a lay person appointed b
8 the Governor and the other is a professional educator who is 9 appointed by the Board to carry out their administrate--to ad-
10 minister their policy for the sysbem.
zCJ 11 l-
.'o."....
@;i
ANNE HAGER: And that is--
JIM MULLINS: The Chancellor.
ANNE HAGER: The chancellor and he is the equivalent
! 14 of the State Superintendant for the Board-of Education?
l-
'<"l
:J:
15 .!)
JIM MULLINS: Yes, you can make that similarity.
CJ
:':"> 16 .~..
NH1E HAGER: Okay .
1:1
Z
<l
17 ::i
MELVIN HILL: Now my question here was not so much
18 that we should make him an independant Constitutional officer
19 and give him separate authority. The question really was,
20 should some provision be put in the Constitution to state that
21 the Board of Regents shall appoint a Chancellor to serve as the
22 Chief Exective officer of the Board of Regents who shall serve
23 at their pleasure or some such statement. I'm not sure that thE
24 public is aware that the Chancellor is in fact the Chief Execu-
25 tive of the Board of Regents and that was my question. It was
PAGE 8
nbt to give hime some independant source of authority as much 2 as it was to add a clarification for the public. 80--
3
JIM MULLINS: Well, it's certainly not in the Consti-
4 tution as such, but the statutes and the authorities of the Re-
5 gents you know declare that they will appoint this person and
6 further more it then declares what his responsibilties maybe
7 statutorily. Once again, I think it goes back to a question
8 that we discussed yesterday about the general purpose of that
9 Constitution and whether we should relieve, I mean maintain it,
10 you know in general terms and let the statutes be, you know,
Czl
11 j: explicit definitions of those items and so I would still feel
..'o"....
~ 12 ~ that it would not be necessary to put him in the Constitution.
~r~! The fifth one, I .find that an interesting type of question whic 14 I think really must relate itself more to the legal researcher. Ioil ::t 15 .:I You can read through these things and have some opinions of CI :':"> 16 .~.. things that should be brought forward, but when we talk about Q Z 17 ~ the specific powers, duties of the Board of Regents as provided
18 in law existing at the time of adoption of the forty~five shoul
19 it be brought forward and included in this constitution. I
20 think first of all one has to research what those particular
21 statutes were. I understand that y'all are right now in some
22 bit of a legal debate over whether they now have the cloak of
23 Constitutionality. That is, laws that were subsumed under fort
M five and brought forward and if they do have that cloak of con-
25 stitutionality then the question is should you eliminate them
PAGE 9
or maintain the Constitution as \'I1ritten with those particular
2 statutes as part of it. And the research that \.oJould be necess
3 ary in my opinion is to see whether we have obsol"?te statutes,
4 things that are no longer applicaule, you knO\'l, to the opera-
5 tions of the Regents or State Board of Education, whatever you
6 are looking at and if so, eliminate those. If it's not necess
7 ary and tlle statutes that have subsequently been developed \Vii'
8 adequately handle that question then perhaps that should be
9 sufficient. So I guess what I'm doing is taking sort of a mid
10 die of the road in sayinf, that the research that tells Hhat
"z
11 ;::
..'o"....
@;I
statutes are there, their applicability to present operation and whether they should be Constitutional or not \vould be determined by the local researcher and if so then I would say thct
! 14 !;; -e( :z:
15 Q
"'";;) 16 .~..
Q
Z
-e(
17 :
that
they should not be brought forward. ANNE HAGER: Are they protected from beinp; repealed? JIH HULLINS: I think that is their debate. ANNE HAGER: That's what they're trying to say becausE
18 I wondered vrtlY you couldn't just say as provided by law, but
19 if there is a certain cloak then you have to add the other phrase
20
BELVIN HILL: Right. He sent out earlier to the mem-
21 bers of the Committee and I Hish I had been able to get this tc
22 you so you could have had the benefit of it, but \le sent a lis t ,
23 not just a list, but a copy of all of the la\.oJs which this re-
24 fers to. It's easier with the Board of Regents than with the
25 Board of "Education bec2Use it is very clear that we're talking about
PAGE 10
32-101 to--
2
JIM MULLINS: I read through those.
3
ImLVlf::L.HILL: 32-142 and well Henry feels that is in
4 fact what we are talking about so it's just a question of going 5 through each of those to see which ones need to be brought for-
6 ward. Now the one on the lump sum allocation is one that is
7 very important to the operation of the university system and
8 one that they would not want to loose. The Board would not wan
9 to loose under any case and they would like to see it given
10 Constitutional status directly. It has --
Czl
11 I-
.'ol1."..
ANNE EAGER: 32-116?
@;~
debate
MELVIN about its
HILL: Yes. status, the
32-116. Just to eliminate this feeling was, well let's just brin~
14
~
I-
that
position
forward
and
include
it
as
part
of
the
Board
of
'"
:J:
15 .:> Regents provisions in the constitution. And then the question
Cl
'":::l
16 ~... was, hThat other things are there in here? I spoke wi th Henry
Q
Z
17 : and he had said there was a couple others that he would like to
18 see. but I don't believe he felt that they were of the magnitud
19 of the first one. The lump sum allocation is the most import-
20 ant, but then 32-141 relating to sale of property in the uni-
21 versity system and 32-142 conveyances how executed, 32-143 use
22 of proceeds from these conveyances and 32-145 condemnation of
23 private property. Those--they wouldn't have to be brought for-
24 ward exactly as is, but language that covers those would pro-
25 bably be also helpful and then he felt that we could eliminate
PAGE 11
this reference back to these old laws.
2
JIM MULLINS: Yes, yes. Well, assuming that one want
3 to override the debate and meet those specific things the Re-
4 gents feel are very important and german~ to their operation.
5 I donlt have much argument with that, yet if one pursued the
6 debate and found that these statutes did not have the cloak of
7 Constitutionality then they would stand on their own as statutes
8 which explained the manner in which, you know, the Board of Re-
9 gents would be operated and where their money would come from
10 and how it would be given. I know that when George Simpson had
11 5CzI his problems with the present Board of Regents and Simpson was
.o".".
12 ~ very much liked by the General Assembly and sometimes not liked
~~- ~ by it , but more liked than disliked. And in that process when
14 .~.. they did eliminate the gentleman from his position there was a
'<"l;
:&:
15 ~ cry to say, weIll just line item you people. Now, that would CI 0<: ~
16 ~ certainly bring to bear concern about the lump sum provision
oz
<l;
17 : because the General Assembly can, as we know, change its statutes
18 but it is very difficult to change its CJnstitution except
19 through the Constitutional referendum. So if they got themselv s
20 incapsulated wi thin the Constitution there would be greater 21 safety, yet at the time same time I think my feeling goes back 22 to the original statement so I I m consistent on this point that to 23 get this specific in the Constitution in my opinion is not that 24 necessary. There are times when we see the need for organiza~~ 25 tional change. Not for the reasons just given, but there are
PAGE 12
needs ~\Tith the state of time and I think statutorily it's much 2 easier to do, much easier than going back to people on these 3 matters. So if they didn't have the cloak of Constitutionality 4 I would be in favor of continuing them as statute. It has \JOrl<5 ed for these many years. I don't see that ""e have much diffi6 culty in the future for it. And I think it goes back, once 7 again, Hel, to this basic difference. Hhen one looks at the 8 University System with the span of its responsibility, the Re9 gents as an appointed Board and I think that is necessary be10 cause I don't think the whittIer on the corner of the Courtl~use
can elect that person into that position to make the kinds of decisions he must make. Most of those fellows don't know the difference between ~ugronomy and t~e Junior College program. As a result they are not as qualified as a voter to handle the missian that these particular people that they would elect would have to have. In meeting the mission, they need the dollars. The lump sum provides them the opportunity even though it may 18 corne on a base formulae of equivalent fulltime students. That 19 money then can be redistributed in the manner that the Regents 20 see best to carry out the overall mission of each of the insti 21 tutions under their particular p:uidance. And I think it's tllere 22 the difference must be enhanced. Because the University of Georgis is a 23 flagstaff institution of the thuversity System with its broad graduate pro24 gram, Veterinary Science, Medicine, Law, and all of tIle other acad25 emic and professional areas requires a great deal of differencE
PAGE 13
between one to the other. If you're in Chemistry, as an ex-
2 ample and you're going to require electron microscopes that
3 costs up into the five hundred thousand dollars per unit, if I
4 took a course in Graduate Education and Teaching Methodology I 5 can get by there with an eraser, a crayon or rather what do yOL
6 call it--chalk and a classroom and maybe a mimeograph machine. 7 So there is a lot of difference in terms of the money that nee s
8 to be allocated to the type program. And I think Verne Craw9 ford right now in one of his task force is looking at the ques
10 tion of going to prograMatic funding, say as opposed to the
9 ; ;11
"z
j:
..o~....
EFT.
You've got a lot of argument between institutions like
Georgia Southern feels that they've got high EFT, but they don't
get the amount of money that a EFT would bring to that institu
! 14 tion, but the difference is their institution doesn't have the I:zii:
15 ~ programs that vJOuld call for that extra money as say Georgia
"~
:>
16 .~.. Tech would. So, Georgia Tech is going to get more money. And Q Z
17 ::'i I think that is something that the Regents vlill continue to do
18 if they are allowed to under their present system of Govern-
19 ments and I think that the statute is still protective enough
20 even if not in the Constitution.
21
SIBLEY BRYAN: I can assure that the State Board does
22 not want to have Constitutional provisions for line iteming in that budget.
23
JIM MULLINS: I'm sure they don't either.
24
ANNE HAGER: \-Jell, \'7ho is- goinr, to make the final de-
25 cis ion on that? Would it be the Supreme Court or --
PAGE 14
1'1ELVIN HILL: About \'I7hat the status of these lmvs is?
2
ANNE HAGER: Yes.
3
HELVIN HILL: A court when it vias presented with the
4 question. It's never been presented and it, to some extent, i
5 is an academic debate because there is no challenge to it, but
6 this is an opportunity to clear it up. We have the same probl
7 in the Board of Education provisions where laws as of a certai
8 date are frozen and it's not a good draftin~ procedure to refe -
9 ence back to laws because it creates this very problem so
10
I!I Z
11 l-
."oI>.".:
9;1 ! 14 !;; <:z: 15 01) I!I I>: ;;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :<;
going to make an effort in here to address it. We don't have definitive answer though as to whether they're Constitutionall protected. Fie had a debate last time between Friedman and Hen ry Neel about it so I'm not sure of it.
JI11 MULLINS: Were they on different sides? HELVIN HILL: Not after Henry explained his position. ANNE HAGER: But, you are always going to have laws you're bringing forward.
18
HELVIN HILL: He won't be repealing a single law. The
19 only question -- I mean all of these laws will continue.
20
ANNE HAGER: Will continue, right?
21
MELVIN HILL: So we ~lOn' t be repealing anything in
22 these lump sum allocations. Provis ions will continue as a s ta -
23 utory matter. If we didn't have this provision in here, we'd
24 not carry gorward this provision about effective at the date 0
25 adoption of this Constitution or the Constitution of Forty-fiv
PAGE 15
Then the General Assembly could amend this and --
2
ANNE HAGER: 011., I see, I see now. But then a deci-
3 sion does have to be made about how you're going to leave it
4 whether that's going to be blanket or whether -- or else you
5 put it in the Constitution where they can't change it. That's
6 what you were saying. It's a lot harder to change it in the
7 Constitution.
8
SIBLEY BRYAN: Are we not going to try to avoid sayin~
9 in all statutes in affect under the forty-five Constitution?
10
MELVIN HILL: Yes.
11 ;"z::
SIBLEY BRYAN: We want to -- if we make a decision to
.'o.."....
@;i avoid that language then \'Je have to decide '\That we are going tc put in the Constitution and what we are going to leave out of
! 14 the Constitution.
l;;
<I(
:I:
15 ol)
ANNE HAGF.R: You'd have to put it in to protect it
~
~
16 ~... then .
aQz
17
JU1 MULLINS: Seeing that the other side of debate,
18 one would assume that these statutes are certainly not under
19 the Constitution, but because of the nature of hO\J that Consti
20 tutional question was given in forty-five then it might be
21 assumed when the people said in all laws and statutes thereof,
22 you know, do have that cloak Constitutionality. Until the ques
23 tion is asked and that question, you know, could be asked by
24 the General Assembly. They get made at Verne Crauford and Lamar
25 Plunkett and decide \\Tell by Joe we'll line item them. Of courSE,
PAGE 16
you know we've got case law that protects that already. If so
2 then you might have a challenge and you may then have a Judi-
3 cial determination on that issue. I don't know that it needs
4 to be cleaned up by putting it in the Constitution, but a
5 Statute that explains what the role and responsibilities are
6 for the Regents and then how they are going to get their money
7 to carry out that mission. I think that is the role of the
8 statute and that is my only point.
9
~1ELVIN HILL: The Board would recommend keeping the
10 exact language we have before it would recornrnend what you just
e ; ;11 ;"..=oz..:.. proposed. That's our problem.
The Board of Regents will not.
I mean either this lump sum appropriation has to be put in and
14 .~.. we've got to keep the exact same iteros we had, which is not
'"
%
15 .:
something we're inclined to do either from a staff standpoint
"=;;)
16 .~.. or the Committees'themselves. I think there will be an effort
zQ
17 : made to clean it up one way or another. We can always fall
18 back on what we have.
19
JIM MULLINS: As soon as you make your recommenda-
20 tions you Immv, you have another whole debate when it goes
21 downstairs. It's a long ways from conclusion.
22
ANNE HAGF.R: Is it sort of like the sea. Ir comes
23 and goes in waves in "tlanting to change it or is there
24 you knm>J, from lump 811m to line item?
25
I just haven't been in on debates with that or does
PAGE 17
it just depend on Hho's in charge or
2
JU1 MULLINS: Hell, I think anytime that you challengE
3 the University System relative to how they get their money and
4 what they do with it, it always depends on the Chancellor and
5 the Constitution or the Regents at that time and their attitudE
6 toward appropriations people and the General Assembly in gener
7 al. So if they come in saying, "NoT,J here is what you' re going
8 to give me by damn!", excus e me. Then T,Je have the 1 ine item 9 talk coming out and as long as they are coming over and explair-
10 ing and justifying what it is that they need, then the General
11 "z~ Assembly normally enjoys that and gives them, most of the time, o "-
@;IIII what they want and a little more. And Verne Crawford at this time is in very high regards and so are the Regents. As you
! 14 .... know Lamar Plunkett used to be one of them dOT,Vl1.stairs and he i~
'<"t
:E:
15 ~ very smooth and capable.
"aI:
;:)
16 ~ III
ANNE HAGER: But it could be a precarious position
C
Z
<t
17 ::; if -- what someone like him --
18
JIM ~ruLLINS: Well, in reality I'll say that it's not
19 precarious. You just said the argument and debate -- to areue
20 and debate is one thing, but to do is a.nother. This is not go
21 ing to come about and I think just as recently as last year 22 you had Court challenge in other states where Legislatures werE 23 going to take away the ltrn~ sum approach to funding Regents ane 24 Systems and put it on a line item basis and they lost this bat 25 tle. They have I think it is the third time that that bat-
PAGE 18
tle has been lost. So there is at least some case law now that
2 gives some direction even though it's not impinging on what onE
3 would do in Georgia. At least there is a precedent.
4
H"ELVIN HILL: "Jell, the las t time when !1r. Friedman
5 spoke he said that it's a. "dynamic relationship" between the
6 Board and the General Assembly. There is a tension there that
7 is always going to be there and that it is probably to the best
8 bene -- it's to the best interest of both that it occur and
9 this lump sum allocation has been part of it, but he said the
10 way it's drafted and the way it's provided for now, it keeps
"z
11 i=
.'o"..
~
1M
12 ~
~rl
! 14 ...
'<"
::I:
15 ~
"'";:)
16 ~ 1M Q
Z
< 17 :
the debate rather short because everyone seems to agree that this is the way it is and must remain under the present system
JH1 MULLINS: So, it's interesting. SIBLEY BRYAN: To me, the question is, is it -- you say it might not stand the test of time, but the question is, is it something that will stand the test of time? For the reasons you say we should fund the University System in a lump
18 sum for the foreseeable future because of the nature of the
19 provision. Then I think it is appropriate to be a Constitu-
20 tional item.
21
JIN HULLINS: Could be.
22
SIBLEY BRYAN: If it is good management and always
23 will be, it's like -- it's good management to always have a
24 Board of Regents of always appointed, of always for those term
25 and always know their basic things. If funding is that basic
PAGE 19
then I think that you can put it in the Constitution. If it
2 is not then you can put it as a Matter of statute. But for it
3 to be a vehicle then the argument is that the Boa.rd of Regents
4 says, "I T/Jant it to be in the Cons ti tution so you Hon' t have tc
5 argue about it anymore." The Legislature is saying, "I ".Tant
6 that to hang over their head. We've got control over it. Af-
7 ter all they appointed 'em seven years out of seven", So I
8 don't know which - - it I s going through my mind which side is the
9
JIM MULLINS; Hell, I think that is part of the pro-
10 blem that y' all are having to wrestle with and I'm not ~1.elping
you that much with the problem except I agree on the front sidE
of what you say, that the unique nature of the University Sys-
tern does, in my opinion, at least require the lump sum, you
know, allocation for the reasons already given. Now, on the
other side it's a philosophical point of whether or not we
should start puttinp, in how it is to be funded within the Con-
stitution. You know, if we can say for Public Education it
18 will be and that includes to a degree your Regents because the)
19 are the educations being provided. At the same time, it's my
20 feeling that to be specific in the Constitution is going beyon<
21 the purpose, in my opinion, of the Constitution. I think the
22 statutes give definition and that's my only point and I say it
23 is a philisophical point. If it went the other way I'm certair-
24 ly not going to fuss or try to do anything other them support it.
25
MIKE HENRY; I think one argument that may be in favor
PAGE 20
of either putting it in the Constitution or not allowing it to
2 be a Constitutional statute is -- Do you "'ant the Supreme Cour
3 of Georgia to make your public policy when it comes time for
4 that provision to be interpreted? I would think that it "'ould
5 be up to the people to set in their Constitution what their pu' -
6 lie policy is or give it to the General Assembly and allow the
7 to set public policy, but don't leave it in this quasi-Constit -
8 tional status and hanging over their heads or have it have to
9 go to the Supreme Court and allow those seven people to make
10 public policy. It's just not the function of the Judiciary an
11
"z
i=
that's
where
it's
going
to
end up
unless
you
clarify
it;
I
'o.."....
~ 12 ~ would think.
@r~
JIB MULLINS: That's a possibility. Now, there is
! 14 another thing too, we've often, you know, done just as a point
I-
':z":
15 0:1 of inquiry; when we hear people come and ask for changes in lay
"'";;)
16 .~.. or ask for Constitutional Amendments to be given for referendu
oz
17 :: purposes, \'le like to first ask \'I1ho wants 'it and why do they
18 want it. Then we start looking at the nature of that organi-
19 zation and the problems they have experienced and the concerns
20 that may be coming forward. It gets you into a rather interes -
21 ing accountability philosophy. If I applied that to this sit-
22 uation, you might say that here the Regents are with the statute and the
23 statute gives thEJTl this lump sum funding, which the tradition has had sort
24 of a plenary authority to do it. the way they \vanted to do it.
25 They only had two things they had to assure and that is that
PAGE 21
you had an efficient and well organized operation as a result
2 of their decision whatever those two things would be. Now if'
3 they're now concerned about it, why would they be concerned
4 because even though there have been arguments over the years at
5 one time or another nothing has ever been presented to change
6 it. It's just been, you know, a place for argument. Now, if
7 they're concerned about it to the point of getting the protec-
8 tion of the Constitution on the issue, it may be also a way to
9 bring out the supports of accountability within the Regents.
10 It may ~Jell be that they need to come over to the General
11
"z
j:
Assembly
and
stand
before
the
Appropriations
Committee
and
'o.."....
@;i justify exclusively what it is they are asking for and how they plan to utilize these dollars. See, it wasn't too many
! 14 ... years ago ~Jhere they would say ~ve want some money for this,
'~"
:I:
15 Q that and the other and they would get it and then not use it
"'"::)
16 ~... in that direction and claim that they had the Constitutional
zo
~
17 ~
authority to divide it the way they \Janted to.
There is anoth
18 er statute in one of these that you didn't name that says if
19 they do allocate, for example, ten million dollars for a par-
20 ticular building at the University of Georgia Student Center,
21 they have to use that money allocated to that particular appro
22 priation for that purpose. And so, sometimes one might be
23 able to give them more protection than what they need and
24 then greater problems arise and then that would mean if you
25 had a Legislature that was of a mind to all they would simply
PAGE 22
do, they may not control hOH you spent it, but they can control
2 how much you get to spend and then we have more problems than
3 what we really wanted to have. Now, that's just political
4 realities as opposed to ,,,hat we should or shouldn't do. So
5 I'm playing a little philosophy on it and that's another rea-
6 son I think the statutes are so valuable. The statute hasn't
7 been changed and the method by which the Regents are given
8 their money and allowed to spend their money has not been
9 challenged except in argument by a few. So I don't thinle you
10 have the problem and therefore I don't think that ,,,e 'vant to
"z
11 j:
'o.."....
@;j
create a new set of problems by doing somethinp, perhaps we haven't done before.
ANNE HAGER: All right. So, have you talked about
! 14 ... BEN or HUD?
.<:crII 15 olI
JIM }lliLLINS: Well, I read all of those from the book
"'";;;)
16 ~... here and I think I 'viII have to go back to my original s tate-
.azc
17 :;: ment on five. I think that the legal research that shmvs
18 whether or not you have obsolete statutes to be eliminated,
19 but if it means brought forward under the Constitution, I
20 wouldn't think it should be brought forward under the Constitu
21 tion. I think a statute should stand the test of its OvJ!l
22 writing and for its O\VTI purpose. This number six is a I
23 think there is t,vo definitions that I ne.ed to be aware of from
24 the perspective of this Committee. ~Jhen you say, "Should all
25 state supported institutions". and I'm sure that means that
PAGE 23
it would different than if you sa.id, "all institutions that re
2 ceive state support". Now as an example we support DeKalb
3 Community College liberally, but they're not in my terms of
4 definition a state supported institution because they do come
5 under the DeKalb Board of Education and they do have one mill
6 obligation from that county to the support of that institution
7 and they do have tuition, etc. So I don't say that they are
8 a state supported institution, but we are giving a lot of statE
9 dollars. So if your definition means that, then I would pro-
10 bably say, "no". But, then again \V'hat about post-secondary
11
"z
i=
institutions?
Do we say that a Vocational Technical School,
.I.ol..l..:
@;I w~ich is education after grade twelve is higher education or de we mean by higher education Junior Colleges, four year collegs
! 14 and Universities? So, I think it depends on what you think
l;;
:I:
15 ol) about what those terms mean as to whether they should all be
"Ill:
::;)
16 .~.. under; and if not, which ones are not under? I'm not familiar
17
oz :
with it.
18
MELVIN HILL: The question relates to DeKalb County
19 College and it's more a -- the questions that came up in the
20 last meeting to Doctor Friedman vJaS whether he felt that it wa~
21 a matter of public policy, a good procedure to allow counties
22 or localities to create a new college or institution. However
23 here we are thinking colleges rather than vo-tech schools. It
24 'tV'ould not be vJithin the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents"
25 whether this kind of thing that happened with DeKalb College
PAGE 24
should be allowed to proliferate. If it would. And that "JaS 2 really the genesis of this question.
3
JIM MULLINS: Okay. Now, seven I think, relates to
4 vlhat you say. I feel this, that, "No, independent school
5 systems should not be able to authorize". You knovv, '.Je ran
6 into this thing two years ago at the General Assembly down in
7 South Georgia where they ~lanted to create a college dOvm there.
8 I don't feel that that should be within the authority of an
9 independent school system to authorize such a structure.
10
HELVIN HILL: Or a county school system?
"z
11 j:
...oa:
l>.
JIM MULLINS: Or a county school system. Absolutely
@;I not. I think each of our school systems with their unique position and missions have enough problems handling that as op-
! 14
...
'"
posed
to
looking
toward
developing other
institutions
of educa-
:r
15
~
"a:
:::l
tion on a higher level.
I don't think that is their role.
It
16 .~.. oz
is not their mission .
17 ::;
SIBLEY BRYAN: They do run the vocational schools on
18 occasion.
19
JIM MULLINS: They do and there is a question about
20
that.
21
SIBLEY BRYAN: Definition is a problem.
22
JIM ~ruLLINS: As you well know, we have four differ-
23 ent systems of governance for Vocational Technical Schools.
24 As a result we have different quality of delivery in each of
25 those schools and we have different sets of problems in each
PAGE 25
of those schools that raise even other questions. Hhat if that
2 local school system that created it, all of a sudden decides
3 they don't want it anymore and then they are not supporting it,
4 which is true in two instances. All that school is receiving
S is state funds and whatever federal funds they may be able to
6 draw now. And they're 8iving less of an opportunity to the
7
students
as
a
result
of
funding
limitations,
deteriation - ...- ~....' ~'-
..--.~
of
8 buildings, etc. So, you have a problem there. If you've got
9 the state operating two -- one North and one South -- they get
10 along pretty well for the most part because all you have to do
is get a Legislative Committee to go down and look at them and
under the state section of state operated school sections of
the budget we could throw money in there pretty easily and
they generally get it. I think there is a problem in referencE
to that whole business. You might ought to just hit these
three together, six, seven, and eight. DeKalb first. DeKalb
was created under a law, that I think is no longer, you know, 18 in operation and I don't think you can develop another school
19 in the manner in which that one was developed. Now, I may be
20 wrong on that so the legal people will have to be sure about
21 that one. DeKalb is a community college now with this un22 ique situation -- owned by the Dekalb County Board of Educa23 tion, supported by one mill 10calJy, supported by funds under 24 a special law that's a rather interesting thing from the 2S Georgia General Assembly each year. They come back each and
PAGE 26 every year wanting more and more money and we are studyin~
2 them right now at their request of a Special Board. I don't
3 think that you could subsume that particular college, but I
4 think you can keep others from being created.
5
ANNE HAGER: The Board of Regents does not have any
6 powers over DeKalb Junior College?
7
HIKE HENRY: Can you put conditions on that funding?
8
JIM MI.JI.LINS: Well, the funding. Oh yes the funding, you knOv-T.
9
ANN HAGER: Is that line itemed?
10
JU1 MULLINS: It is line itemed for than. Absolutely. And
Czl
11 j: see, we also do tuition equalization grants. That isn't ,vhat this is.
e ; i.'o0".... There are sane who are saying, "hlhy don't you put us on the same basis as you do the other private institutions who are getting tuition equal-
l 14 ization grants?" Those are grants that prevent us from having 1:z;;:
15 01) to expand the University System by sending students and paying Cl '~"
16 .~.. part of their education money, like six hundred dollars per Q z
17 g full time student. So DeKalb right now is getting far in the
18 excess of that, maybe twelve hundred and seventy-two dollars
19 per student already. They feel that on a full time equivalency
20 relationship under the tuititon equalization plan that they can
21 get more money than that. I think that they've got it figured
22 where they can get around nineteen hundred and tv-lenty-One dol-
n lars per student if they went to that. We've found that their
24 figures have been \l1rong several times and T.l1e jus t haven't spotted
~ that one yet. I do feel that all state supported institutions
PAGE 27
of higher education should be under the Regents and that's why
2 I ask the question about state supported. To receive some statE
3 support does not make you state supported, that's what I'm say-
4 ing.
5
ANNE HAGER: ~ut, you feel like anymore that would be
6 created from now on should be?
7
JIM MULLINS: Well, yes and I don't think that the
8 school system should be able to create them. They should be
9 created through the recommendations of the Regents and by the
10 General Assembly.
"z
11 j:
.."o....'
@;i DeKalb
MIKE HENRY: What are the advantages to the people of County to have their own community college?
JIM BULLINS: \\I'ell, their asking that question now
! 14 !;; themselves.
:<z:l
15 oI:l
""';;;)
HIKE HENRY:
I'm a resident of that county. Well,
16
~...
o
but
what--I
mean
they would
still have
to be
accredited,
I
Z
<l
17 ::; think or they v.ould still have to meet certain standards to
18 make sure that once you graduated from DeKalb Junior College
19 you could go to University of Georgia or you could go to some
20 university.
21
JH1 MULLINS: They are accredited That's not a prob-
22 lem.
23
ANNE HAGER: Your private institutions have to meet
24 the accreditation too.
25
JIM MULLINS: Only if they subscribe to them. Now,
PAGE 28
if tl1ey're going to get state dollars they have to do that.
2
ANNE HAGER: Is there chance someday the Board of Re-
3
gents might take over that college.
4
JIM MULLINS: Only by the college declaring to give
5
it up.
6
ANNE }iAGER: \rJe got into this at that other meeting.
7
There is no provision giving, isn't that right,the Board of
8
Regents the power to --
9
JIM MULLINS: Absolutely not nor should they have it.
10
ANNE HAGER: No, I don't think they ought to take it,
CzJ
11 j:
.0~.... but if DeKalb College comes to them and says, "would you please
12 ~
~@._r -~ ~
ii: you know we don't want to operate this any longer, we want to
~ turn it over to you." Are they somewhere legally able to do
! 14 !;; that or-%
15 .!)
CJ
'":)
16 ~
JIM MULLINS: No. In fact that question arises in
Qz the same issue of the vocational school under the local Board
17 :
of Education. Suppose they no longer want it. There is no way
18
for the State Board then to take it over, but there are numerou
19
ways it can be handled; in fact there are three or four ways
20 that can be done. One is very difficult where two system con-
21
solidate and as a result they handle it. Another is through
22 a contractual agreement, that could be handled. So, there are
23 ways it can be done if there is desire for it to me done.
24 COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, I need to change my tape.
25
Thank you.
PAGE 29
JIM MULLINS: The last question, I think relates some
2 bit to this. When you say should tbe Constitution encourage
3 cooperation between the Board of Regents? I don't think the C 4 stitution should ever encourage cooperat~on. I think it should
5 provide for, you know the governance of handling certain kinds
6 of things. Now, it would be my opinion of all the arguments
7 that have been generated regarding vocational education and how
8 it's to be governed by an entirely separate third board created
9 by all kinds of animals or whether or not there should be com-
10 bination of boards and such. It brings us almost to this ques-
CzI
11 o..jc..o:..: tion, the Governor and his Liaison Committee has, I think it
@;i is, three members of the Regents and three members of the State Board to get together and not just talk about vocational tech-
14
~
l-
nical
education.
They talk about any concern that they have.
'"
:I:
15 ol) But, if you want to do something Constitutionally, then empow-
CcoI:
::>
16 .~.. er that so called Liaison Committee to deal specifically with
aQz
17 the question of vocational technical education and have their
18 decisions plenary and biriding'upon both boards from which they
19 r:epresent. In other words don't go back to the full Board with re~
20 commendation. They come to that as a represenLative of the Re...:
21 gents, as representative of the State Board and they are then 22 empowered to make the decisions for vocational technical ed23 ucation. You have both parties, I think that you can come out 24 with something that gives the State Department articulating fro 25 secondary to post-secondary and then that gives the control
PAGE 30
again back to the Regents in an manner of controlling post-sec-
2 ondary education, which is more in their realm than it is in th
3 State Departments' realm. The State Department doesn't fUlly 4 know what to do with post-secondary education and normally does
5 not do a _lot wi th it. So, --except to ask for more of them.
6
AlTNE EAGER: It was Doctor Freund, I guess who men-
7 tioned the contractual agreements not only between the Board of
8 Regents and the Board of Education, but the private institution 9 and suggested maybe some wording he said, "One of their re-
10 sponsiblities should be to work with all other similar institu-
I:l
11
Z
l-
tions
whenever
possible
to coordinate
their
efforts."
You stil
e ; ;.'oQ.".. wouldn't agree with that? JIM MULLINS: Well,
I think Doctor
Freund has some
! 14 tremendously good ideas, but there is one thing you've always
l-
UI
<l
IS
:r
.:.
got
to
look
at
when
you
consider
the
various
territories
of
I:l
'";:) 16 .~.. different segments of the Goverment either within the executive
Q
Z
17 :<:ll branch or between the various divisions of Goverment. They
18 will agree as long as they like what's happening and sometimes
19 they only agree to disagree. So as long as you keep it on that
20 type of a encourage cooperation and agreement, it's not going
21 to work. It hasn't and it won't. Now, when you talk about wha
22 the Regents and the State Department have done in terms of othe
23 schools recently, like Bainbridge, like Brunswick, like DeKalb,
24 here you have vocational schools in conjunction with junior ~ colleges. All right, you have the same kind of situation pri-
PAGE 31
vately over at DeKalb, that's four and you now have an agree2 ment that has just been signed for the fifth one; that's in
3 Clayton. Now, it makes good sense that's that where it should
4 be housed in certain respects. But, at the same time, with
5 that kind of contract, when you house on the universities sys-
6 tmens' property then the complete governance is now under the
7 Board of Regents. So, four of those five are Regent controlled
8 The department contributes, you know ,their share of the operation
9 of that particular vocational wing. They have no control or
10 say so over this operation, hiring, or etc. That then comes un-
ez)
11 i= der the administration of that institution. So, in essence you
'o.."....
~ 12 ~ are getting it and the trend must appear to be in that directio
~/~! when you consider you've got five of them and several years ago 14 you didn't have any of them.
t-
on ~ :I:
15 .:>
ANNE HAGER: It seems impossible almost to say then
Cl
'";;) 16 .~.. that either the State Board of Education or the Board of Regent~
Q
Z
~
17 : should operate all of those. I mean you can't really separate.
18
JIM MULLINS: Yes, there is some problems either way.
19 The State Board of Education with its primary mission of ser-
20 ving elementary and secondary education also, to, have to vi~ 21 politically for dollars, you have maybe twenty three hundred 22 and fifty five superviors of vocational education and you have 23 maybe thirty something directors of vocational technical educa24 tion. '.I.'he numbers alone tell you where the emphasis is going.
25 The difference in the Governors' structure for' where they
PAGE 32
may control specifically to and then have overriding say so in
2 several others does indicate that vocational technical educa3 tion would not be a primary motivation for the Department of
4 Education. We found that to exist in several instances. I 5 don't say that in criticism, I just say that in the organiza-
6 tional make up, not people just the make up of the organiza7 tion and the obligation that organization has.
8
ANNE HAGER: But, there is no way that you can put it
9 all under the Board of Regents, is there?
10
JIH HULLINS: All of what?
"z
11 j: g( o "w-
@;I
l\.TTNE HAGr.',R: The vocational technical schools? JIM MULLINS: Well, I'm not--
ANNE HAGER: Or do you think they should be?
! 14 ...
JIM MULLINS: Well, I'm not a Constitutional schollar
'z"
15 ~ I don't know how you would work that out.
"g(
::>
16 ~ w Q
ANNE !{AGF.:R: Do you think they should--
Z 17 ::;
SIBLEY BRYAN: Are you saying educationally, you should
18 work under the Board of Regents instead of the Department of
19 Education?
20
JIM HULLINS: Well, there are some problems with vo-
21 cational technical education under Regents because you know
22 ever so often the Regents think of themselves primarily, you
23 know as p.c'ademicians in vocational technical education, 24 you know ,comes under a whole new category. They may also make 25 it a red headed stepchild. So, you've got that kind of a diff-
PAGE 33
iculty.
2
SIBLEY BRYAN: Well, you also have the difficulty of a'
3 great deal of vocational education being done on the secondary
4 level, in which case you would want a continuity of the pro5 graming into the post secondary level. If you put one under
6 one and one under the other, it's going to be hard to let
7 the Regents run the high--the comprehensive high school.
8
JIM MULLINS: Well, you don't won't to do that. Now,
9 see comprehensive high schools are secondary.
10
SIBLEY BRYAN: Then you are faced with the problem, if
"z
11 o..ja..::.. you say that flatly and then you are faced with the problems
@);~I of splitting vocational education then to secondary and post secondary as you do, you know the academic side.
! 14 ...
JIH BULLINS: vJell, I think , you know really this,
':-z"<:
15 olI Sible~ is my whole point. That's why we are saying that it's
"a:
:;)
16 .~.. in your Constitutional declaration in eight rather than saying
co
Z
-<
17 : agreed. Give them the plenary power to control. Y.ou have.
18 three State Board members, you have three Regents and those
19 three people--six people can sit down and discuss this with
20 th~~ staff support of how you get into articulation of curric-
~.
21 ulum from the secondary to the post secondary. I'll tell you
22 that today we don't have it and it's all under one right now
23 or mostly under one and it's not there. You have many other 24 problems because of the governance. structure. So you've got a 25 chance to strike a blow at governance right here. I'm not
PAGE 34
saying that's the best answer, ~ut I do know that going to
2 a third board--we had a little controversy on that back awhile
3 ago, didn't we? So, I don't think the third board would be ac-
4 ceptable to anybody and yet, here you're taking members of ex-
5 isting boards and you're bringing them out almost like a liaiso
6 as the Governor invisioned, but instead of letting them just
7 coorperatively discuss it, give them the power to decide it.
8 I think then that might be more acceptable.
9
MIKE HENRY: Is the Legislature aware of this problem
10 and could they not perfectly legally set up the board to over-
11
5Czl
see
the
voc-tech
education
in
this
state?
Are
they
just not awa
e
91"!!-!t -' .o.. 12 ~ of the problem or--
~
JUI MULLINS,
Oh, they are very much aware of the
14 ~ problem. In fact, t~~ir studying the issue and the reports tha
':"r 15 I ol) was mentioning to you--or alluding to I should say are legis-
Cl
'";;;)
16 ~ lative reports. They've been in this thing now about four year.
Q
z
17 : Now,
there
.
1S
one
thing
that
the
Legislature'
has
as
its top pri-
18 ori ty and that is the enhancement and improvement of vocational
19 education on both the secondary and post secondary levels. So,
20 their primary obligation and those of the staff that serve them
21 is to see vocational educations' improvement. They want to do
22 it through the appropriate bodies that, you know have been or-
23 ganized to govern and to serve in these areas meaning the State
24 Department of Education and the Regents. Of course, that means
25 local boards where they, themselves have developed. We also
PAGE 35
have area boards and--so you've got some strange organizations 2 out there, some working better than others. When you start tal}3 ing about curriculum articulation and even knowing whether the 4 programs that we are offering in our vocationsl technical schoo s 5 or the cluster approaches within our comprehensive high schoo s 6 are effective to the purpose for which they are set. There is 7 very little data, very little follow up that can give that kind 8 of supporting evidence and that's another difficulty. Now, you 9 have on the federal level, you've got reports coming down sayinc
10
all it's cracked up to be."
DR. CRIM:
Just on that particular point, I think
so that we will have one system and so that
18
we can assure an equal level of quality does not necessarily
19
obtain. I just wanted to toss that up and any way that you
20
slice it that you're going to have vocational education and it
21
will just me kind of a outcome of how people feel about it, 22
the local circumstances: here, take the city of Atlanta whereaE
23
we have very few blue collar opportunities. It just never wil 24 take on the same level of significance say as the university
25 or academic pursuits allbeit that it is very necessary. I mean
PAGE 36
Atlanta Area Tech is a very popular institution and it's always 2 loaded in terms of its enrollment, but those are persons who 3 have, for the most part have gone out and come back and want to
4 do something particular.
5
SIBLEY BRYAN: Excuse me, but educational community
6 is taking on a big job when they decide they want to technicall
7 and vocationally educate people. So much of it is done, proba-
8 bly ninety per cent of it is done in the places of business or
9 the place of the final job anyway. Even with all of your area
10 tech vocational schools and so forth, you're probably not pro-
Iz:l
11 ~ viding but ten per cent of the people with ten per cent of the
e ---I..o.... 12 ~ skills for the whole work force. There is a great danger in it
in my mind for the educational community to say," okay, we can
14
1
)- satisfy
all
the
needs
for
the
industry
through
our
tech
schools
l:;r;
15 ~ voc tech schools and so forth." It can't--there's not a single,
I:l
'~"
16 ~ for instance, one of the big jobs, technical jobs in the state
Q
z
17 : as big as we're in is dying and finishing a fabric. I don't
18 think we have a single technical school that's teaching that at
19 all nor would we want to put the facility in, but there is a lot
20 of people on it. That is just a far out example of a very high-
21 ly technical thing that you wouldn't attempt to do in the schoo
22 room. And so--you can get in a big mess with trying to decide.
23 I think the main question you have to do is whether you want it
24 under the State Board of Education or whether you want it under
25 the Board of Regents. I think the federal money is by definiti n
PAGE 37
isn't it,--didn't we come out in the last meeting that it is
2 des~gnated as the State Department of Education shall be the
3 funding agent for federal vocational funds?
4
JIH HULLINS: They are ones who have been designated
5 Well, on that basis I--you know you can argue either way and I
6 think Lonnie was really coming out with that particular point.
7 You see it's not that clear cut. As we said, we've got four
8 different systems of governance in vocational education and you
9 have now the State Department with the comprehensive high schoo s.
10 YOu know, they want to polifierate still another hundred and
11
"z
i=
seventy
two
of
those
things
or
two hundred
and
forty
two
of
0.."..'..
@ r12 .~"..' them. Now, those schools all have to have clusters hecause the .iz=.. are going with the cluster approach, philsophy now. Those clus V on
14 >- ters are a identified as what goes in them and what kinds of
15
lo:z-n:
~
materials
and what
kinds
of
people
and what
kind
of
certificate
""':;)
16 .Cz.D. etc. You know, we'll be in those schools to deliver the pro-
Q
17
Z
"'CD
gram
and
yet
they
haven't
arrived
at
a
philosophy
of
what
they
18 are trying to do, explore or prepare a person to enter into the
19 job market. Now, you may be able to go both ways, you know, I
20 don't argue that, but we hear the philsophy one time, one way
21 and another time another depending on what you are trying to
22 justify. So, there are difficulties there. Now, the only poin
23 I was making, if you brought three members of the Regents and
24 three members of the State Board under a vocational technical
25 body that would plea plenary in determining, you know the opera
PAGE 38 tions of vocations I technical education. I think that you woul 2 get a greater assurance of articulation of curriculum from one 3 level to that of the other, which now you do not have. It is 4 completely missing unless a voc-tech director wishes to talk to 5 a college person. In Carrolton, let me just you an example of 6 what I'm speaking of; Carol County Tech has been trying now fo 7 two years to work with West Georgia. Now, they've got some 8 faculty committees, they can't agree on anything therefore they 9 have no agreement be~ween West Georgia and Carol Tech. Where 10 does Carol Tech send its students to work on Associate kinds
=z~
11 of degrees and exchange programs? To Floyd Junior College. No
io
w~
~~. ~tt:::n:e:::C:oi:U:::n: ::W~eY::j::::tr::o::lm::i::i:~an
! 14 Quick start programs are also involved in this kind of thing. ~ ~ x~
15 ~ So, they are going to build a building to do the quick start
~ ~ ~
16 ~ program for this record plant. Now, the technical school will
oz
~
17 : supply much of the instruction and things of this type of na18 ture. The State will build the building, buy the equipment, an 19 will train the people and provided for the instructors. The 20 company just comes in, which is part of the, you know enticemen 21 to come in here. Well, that doesn't sound so bad until you fin 22 out that Carol Tech, you know was authorized an extension on 23 their school where they have programs that aren't in these othe 24 areas needed and people are waiting on this. They've got it 25 dry-walled where it won't be until 1983 until they will be able
PAGE 39
to get the additional funds to complete the building and to
2 equip the building and to offer programs. In the interim, we
3 are putting out a lot of money to do a study to write the plans 4 for Gwinnett County to build a structure in Gwinnett County, 5 which is eighty thousand square feet larger than is justified 6 by the local needs assessment or by any other plan of reasonabl 7 consideration. Now we are going to talk about building one out 8 in Clayton and we haven't even completed doing the things we've 9 already committed to. So you see there is a lot of problems in
10 here because of problems of that nature. Now we're getting
11 "~ ready also with appellation funds in Carroll County to develop
@_. ~ ~
f 12
o'~"
~
a
comprehensive
highkch001.
But there is clusters.
There has
been no talk between West Georgia, Carroll Vocational Tech and
! 14 the school system about what kind of exchange programs, what
~
'" 15 ~ kind of excnange of facilities could be used for greater cost effec-
16 ".'~".. tiven~ss and meeting the various needs of that area. Those are Q z
17 ~ some of the things, I think even the Governor now has begun to
18 become aware of and is interested in seeing something being donE. 19 So I am saying that the Legislature can't handle that entirely 20 and I don't think the State Board can handle that entirely and 21 don't think that the Regents can handle that entirely nor can 22 local Boards of Education handle that entirely. But if you had 23 some kind of a uniform governance system to grapple with those 24 questions and to write the policies, then I think you'll probab25 ly find a greater uniformity in direction and that problems would
PAGE 40
begin to ease a bit and m~ybe you would just creatd a whole set
2 of new ones. But at least those would be to ~ome answers.
3
SIBLEY BRYAN: I can't support what Doctor Crim says
4 if--it sounds like the problems that you are saying we have as
5 result of the governance and that doesn't follow to me if all
6 of the vocational is under the State Department and under the
7 Board of Education. They should be able to then be in the best
8 position to mediate those differences. The only thing that you
9 have been talking about that is not under the same roof at some
10 point, is West Georgia.
11 5z~
JIM MULLINS: No, no, no, no, no, n~ I'm sorry I jus
o
~
~~ ._~ -12 ~~
gave you school,
an how
example you can
of how have a
you could have a voc-tech school,
comprehensive high how you can get in-
! 14 to an additional expansion of facility through a quick start
~ ~ ~
%
15 ~ program--
~ ~ ~
16 ~ w Q Z
SIBLEY BRYAN: Those three--and all of those are un-
~
17 g der the Department of Education.
18
JIM MULLINS: No.
19
SIBLEY BRYAN: Under the vocational education, are
W they not?
21
JIM MULLINS: No.
22
SIBLEY BRYAN: Aren't they through the State Depart-
23 ment? Whatever comes through the region--
24
JIM MULLINS: The comprehensive high school is under
25 the, you know the local governance structure, you know the loca
PAGE 41
board which is answerable to the policies of the State Board.
2
SIBLEY BRYAN: Exactly.
3
JIM MULLINS: All right. West Georgia is under the
4 Regents.
5
SIBLEY BRYAN: You didn't mention that point. West
6 Georgia is the only one that is not involved in that. The quic
7 start, if Carroll Tech and your comprehensive high school are all
8 under the same roof, are they not?
9
JIM MULLINS: I'm not sure Carroll Tech--no, Carroll Tech
10 is an area tech, I think. I'm not sure about that. I'm not
"z
@;;11
...
..oll..C...
sure
about Carroll Tech.
SIBLEY BRYAN: Well, it's as an area tech--
Jn1 MULLINS: Some techs are.
! 14 ...
SIBLEY BRYAN: --nical school?
':"z:
15 .:I
JIM MULLINS: Some techs are and some techs aren't.
~
~
16 ~...
SIBLEY BRYAN: Doesn't it eventually report to the
gaz
17 State Board of Education?
18
JIM MULLINS: Not directly. The State Board of Ed-
19 ucation will provide M & 0 monies and will provide for salaries
20 and things of this nature, will set certain overriding policies 21 but they are still reflective of the area Board that is going 22 to give control to those factors and the local monies that come 23 in to carryon those programs. So, it's not an entire State 24 Board, you know controlled program. See, if you've got a local 25 Board that operates the thing, the State Board can't come in
PAGE 42
and tell them, you've got to support it. They can only give
2 them the monies that they are allowed to give them through the
3 appropriations from the General Assembly. A lot at times,
4 the State Board then calls themselves nothin~ more than a flow-
5 through a~ency.
6
SIBLEY BRYAN;, If that remains true, then \;Jllat good is
7 the Board of Regents and the State Board's three people fro~
8 each gping to do in resolving that situation?
9
JUl HULLINS: Hell, I think I probably said that to
10 a degree. I said I don't know that it will solve it cornplete-
Czl
11 j: ly. I said it would give you more uniformity and direction and ..'o.."..
@ ; j you may solve some problems. I don't knO\v \lhat ne\'l problems you might create, but you will at least solve problems that
! 14 have been with us a long time that have not been addressed. I':<"zl:
15 olI See, when the Department did the Zimmermans' study, it 1rJasn' t
Cl
'";;;) 16 .~.. their study entirely, even though they did \-lrite the RFPs on it .
CI Z <l
17 : But they "lant to live by it and that study "JaS outdated before
18 it was even published and as a result of that they want to live
19 by it because it's the only plan of action that they have, you
20 see. It's reached a great deal of controversy anu resistance'
21 in the General Assembly. I think it \vi11 continue to have those
22 problems. No\-! , I don't knmJ that bringing together these D-JO
23 Hoards \'Vi.ll solve all of those issues. I don't want to appear to
24 be that naive, but at the same time we're going toi1.8.ve to have sane \vay in
25 '\Jhich these Board's can talk to eac:l other, other than agreeing to
PAGE 43
disagree.
2
DR. CRP-1:
But, still Jim you're pushing the same"
3 point and I think Sibley is doing the same. Since thirteen in
4 California, as you know the State is now funding even local
5 school systems up to eighty percent. With the funding the
6 control has gone along with it so that local school systems hav
7 less to say about what goes on. similaJlly with--even with the
8 area vocational schools, Metropolitian Atlanta has a very dif-
9 ferent kind of job market than say Carrolton or some--or Bruns-
10 wick or some other place. As you have indicated with compre-
11 ~"z hensive high schools that they are going to go tb go to clus-
f...
~---. I12 ~ ters and they could--now, that has been one of the problems, sa with vocational education through the years because they have
14 ~ identified those occupatic)nal clusters from 'dashington. These
'<:"z: 15 q are those which we will fund and uniformily through out the
";'")
16 ~ Uni ted States when, in fact you may have no need for that particular"
zQ
17 :< occupation in your local area. My point is, is that I don't
18 know if you were to have those three representatives from each
19 group with accountability only to those groups making final and
20 binding decisions a very far distance away from where the action
21 really is, I could think--I would think on that, that you woul
22 create you a new set of problems that would take away--perhaps
23 some the uniqueness and, I mean allbeit that at the local leve
24 you bungle--you know you bungle your way through a lot of 1:.."lirigs.
25 Still, indeed is that you have the opportunity or at least the
rr--------------~-------.
_
PAGE 44
choice to kind of adapt the progr8JT1C1ing to fit, to better fit the
2 needs of that local community. Like here in the city of Atlant
3 all right, we're TTansportation, we're Commerce, what have you
4 and we have a better chance of adapting those programs at Tech
5 to fit the needs. I mean, you can't--computer programs, we just
6 can't give enough of them because of the demand, say in our
7 area for them. This is a point that somehow we need to make
8 and I'm really very fearful every time we talk about some kind
9 of centralized control, not because I'm fearful from the point
10 of the local Boards, but in terms of the service delivery. I
z~
11 ..~j..:.. mean on that end, do we have the opportunity to really have the
~ @r ~given /~)
12 !':"! flex-- I mean the flexibilty for providing for the needs in that ~
community.
! 14 1;;
JH1 r1ULLINS: Yes. Well, I would, of course ,we were
<l
:t
15 ~~only addressing the question of, you know these representative
'":;)
16 ~~ people on a Board making decisions, where they are both making
z
<l
17 : them now, but separately. The point that I would hope is exact
18 ly what you are talking about. You see what you are saying rig t
19 now is what's not happening. Example in, at Athens Area Voca-
20 tional Tech or Athens Technical School belongs to Clarke County 21 They put out a need assessment. They found they needed a--will 22 just say, I forgot what it was, but they needed a Nursing Train 23 ing course. They needed maybe eight thousand square foot new 24 building to do that. The Department says we are going to give
25 you eight thousand new square foot building and we are going t
PAGE 45
pay for it through these allegated funds, but you can't put a
2 Nursing program in there. You going to have to put a--let's
3 just sayan Automotive Mechanics' program. They say, but we
4 don't need a Automotive Mechanics' program. Across the street
S we've got a proprietary school doing that. We've got three
6 other, you know organizations down here doing it and our com-
7 munity survey indicates we don't need anymore mechanics in At-
8 hens, what we need is nurses. We don't have any nurses and we
9 have got people that want it. They said it doesn't matter. Thi~
10 report says, "you can have one of those." What did they get?
They got automative mechanics. The same thing happened right
down here below Columbus and the same thing is getting ready to
happen right dOWD in North Carter. So, we've got those kinds
of problems. Now, that's because you have one group making a
unilateral decision, is part of it. I don't kn6~v this otller is ar
answer to it, but I do think that a lot of the articulation ques'"
tions that we presently have are not being met.
18
SIBLEY BRYAN: There is another problem in that same
19 area. What the student wants to learn has a lot to do with what
20 course he signs up for.
21
JIM MULLINS: Sure.
22
SIBLEY BRYAN: And the point is that auto mechanics
23 is probably the most popular in the state simply because they
24 are more people that want to take. Forget the job market and
2S they are plenty of others--
PAGE f;.o rr------------------------------------------,
3IH l1ULLINS: 'P1e local needs Ctssessment addresses
2 that, Sibley. That's \oJ;1at I'TTi saying. There 7,N'as nobody dOl'Yn
3 there that wanted it.
4
SIBLEY RRYA~1: I'm not saying that particular case
5 but I'm saying there are cases where you have very popular cour-
6 ses because t~cy are highly visible. Everybody O\ffiS an auto7 mobile. Everybody sees that vIe've got to -~JOrk on them. Every-
8 body is intrigued looking under the hood Ctnd so you've p,:ot a 9 lot of people that want to get into that and they hear they can
10 make good money and so forth. There are other things that are
1z:1
11 5hidden in a factory or a building somewhere that are not very o
. :v
12 ~visible and people don't kno\! too much about it. If you put a
e _. ~course in for them, they "ouldn' t sign up for it simply because
14 ~they vlOuldn't have any familiarity to kno',J 'Hhat it \-7as. So, you
."
-:<rl
15 oll
1:1
vocational education is a very complicated thin~.
Ill:
~
16 .~..
JH1 HULLINS: 011, sure it is.
Q
Z
-<l
17 :
SIBLEY BRYA11:
and my feeling is that it should be
18 under one overall state body, 'Nhich I think is the Board of Ed-
19 ucation where it is right now. Haybe because the Board of f';ov-
20 ernance structure is one attempting to have some local control
21 over primary and secondary education that the vocational should
22 be there because it is more of a tailored situation as Doctor
23 Crim pointed out. If you try to get the
~lhere the Sta te
24 Department ,'lOuld he happy \'Ji th the Board of Regents having somc-
25 thing to do 'V-Jith vocational education it's been ,ken they IDuld have
PAGE L~7
been willing to Hrite a contract "tvith the Regents to provide tha
2 service in a particular area for a pa.rticular thing because itt's
3 more economical or, you know, there are other factors, not just
4 the governance of ~ml good a program T.iJe' re going to give because
5 uc uant a different kind of program just -- more of a thing that
6 is easier to do or more economical to do.
7
J11111ULL1NS: Well, we probably wouldn't agree with
8 this statement, but I think what we've said is the greatest jus-
9 tification for probably a third board, uhere you have represen-
10 tation, you knrnv, from your State Board, from local Board, from
~
11
"z
~your
business
and
industry
sector,
from your
Chamber
of
Commerce,
.o..
12 ~from, you know, the other people who are involved in roakin~ sure
~ ~that --
the area in which a shcool is located does in fact reflect
14 >-the needs. Sec, right nov. we don't have much understanding of
$
:I:
15 ~what the needs are. Be don't generally survey those kinds of
16
"~ ~'" things
and
develop
.
programs
based
on
it.
I think what Lonnie
. zI:l
17 m~ sald was the fact that if the clusters come do~vn and tnis is
18 what you get your money for vnlether or not you need it, you
19 build it. Sometimes, that's not just the State Boards' problem,
20 if the State Board wants the money they've got to do what it
21 takes to get money. None of this is a criticism, but there are
22 problems, as I vJaS sayinp.:, in articulatinp: curriculum and deter-
23 mining \vhere schools are to be located and deternining vJllat
24 courses \vill be offered and also determining \Jhether or not ,,7e
25 cannot, excuse me, \"nether or not "liJe should be usinp: the faci-
PAGE 48
lities that we built in light of the fact that we're not going
2 to have this much capital outlay coming down the road soon.
3 If you have gone to new mechanism for funding capital outlay
4 programs and local schools See that didn't include building
5 voc-technical schools. It didn't include libraries. It didn't
6 include comprehensive high schools so those have still got to
7 be three separate things outside of a hundred million dollar re
8 quest that we are going to get for just renovating and building
9 pUblic schools, you see. I don't think that money is going to
10 be there. Now, if it is not there, we need to be thinking abou
lz.'l
11
...i=
oa<r..:
how
can we
best house
important
programs
that we
all
believe
in
@;I We've got comprehensive high schools in place. We have junior colleges, four year institutions and university institutions
! 14 and we have proprietary schools and vocational technical school I':z":
15 0) all in the same locale and none of them are talking to one al.'l <r: ::l
16 .~.. nother. Each one of them are asking to expland their facility Q Z
17 : to offer something that maybe the other one can offer better or
18 is already offering. So, there is not only articulation, but
19 there is duplication of service, duplication of people, dupli-
20 cation of equipment, duplications of dollars and I think we nee
21 to be a little more cost effective in how we approach our total
22 programatic delivery system. That's really the whole basis of
23 it. I would have to say, I don't know that having three members
24 of the Regent and three of the Board would do that. But, if
25 the reaction to that question was, should a statement encourag-
PAGE 49
ing. I would say I wouldn't vJant to put a statement in the Con-
2 stitution encouraging somebody to cooperate. I would put one
3 in there giving them the plenary pO\ver to discuss that issue and
4 to make it binding back on both of the Boards from which they
5 represent, you knm" from uhich they come on that issue. If it's
6 just to encourage cooperation the Governor has already done that
7 by telling them to meet and their meeting and that should be
8 sufficient.
9
ANNE HAGER: Okay. Now number nine llere?
10
JI11 MULLINS: That one right there, I didn't quite 1..111-
"z
11 ~derstand i t .
In fact I was over at the University the other day
e- ~means .o.. 12 ~and I asked some people there, you knmv, what do you think that to you? They didn't quite understand that one either, at
14 >least for -- you know,to make any kind of intelligent reaction.
l;;
<
:I:
15
oc"r:l)The
only
thing
-
that
I
feel
to
a public institution today is
:;)
16 ~already contracting with private institutiollS. The State Board
Q
z
17 g< is contra~ting with private institutions. I don't know that
18 there is anything in the Constitution that \lould prohibit it
19 and if it is not and again I'll have to, you know, yield to the
W legal people, but if there is nothing prohibiting it, I certain-
21 ly don't think ''Ie need to put anything in allmving it, if i.1e are
22 already doing it, handle it through statute.
23 I
24 that?
ANnE HAGSR: tJouldn't it come under statute nost of
25
HELVIN HILL: Yes, I think so. It 'das really just
PAGE 50
generated at the discussion that we had last time.
2
ANNE HAGER: Yes, they mentioned some specific contracts.
3
SIBLEY BRYAN: Not to prolonp; it, but I've had some
4 discussions ",here we can in the same vocational areas. That
5 was the discussion, I think 1~lere we can't
6
JIN MULLINS: Pay tl1e propietary schools?
7
SIBLEY BRYAN: Yes.
8
.In'!:" MULLINS: 'Hell, you could through statute. I t.'l.ir1k,
9 if you are goinp; into the tuition equalization kind of prograrll,
10 if it were felt necessary then you could probably operate it on a
11
"z
o~contractual
basis
if it were
to
be
approved
through statute hy
(@~) ~I ~
12 "~~" tne General Assembly. It ",ould be a question of decidinp; 'C,]hat
~ ._- you ,vant to do and getting it in. I \vould think that could be
14 ~done. Number ten, I do knm] that \'1e had that as a Constitution-
':z":
15 :al referendum in the past and I haven't heard any of the Presi-
Ill: :;)
16 I~D dents complaining too loudly to any of our Legislative Commit-
z
17 ~tees and, therefore, being as the people approved it, I don't
18 see that we should disapprove it at this time. It doesn't bot-
19 her me and so I don't have any real feeling about that one.
20
HELVIN HILL: There was a movement as part of the
21 revision effort in 196 -- 1978 when they revised Article X to
22 put an authorization for this to be created by the General
23 Assembly and then a companion statute to do it so that there
24 was more flexibility if they wanted to change it in anyway.
25
JIB HULLTNS: Yes.
PAGE 51
HELVIN HILL:That was approved as part of the revis-
2 ion of Article X in 78 so it wasn't really a question of \'\7heth.;.
3 er to eliminate the program, but whether it should be contin-
4 ued as statutory rather than Constitutional for the same rea-
5 son the flexibilty that you mentioned earlier so that was the
6 nature of the question.
7
JIM MULLINS: Okay. So, maybe it's to be continued
8 as a Constitutional revision as opposed to being statutory.
9 Well, if it could be statutory, I would prefer it more statutor~
10 than I would Constituional.
e"z
11
ANNE I-lAGER: The wording probably needs to be--does it
.ol>...
12 ~ need to have this in here about it is hereby ~ authorized and
~--- ~ th~ directed to established, hut not later than the beginning of
14 ~ Fall. of 1977? Does that need to be in there any longer?
'<:"zC:l
15 ~
16 ".:~'>.". o Z <Cl
MELVIN HILL: I--no. ANNE HAGER: So, if you leave it in, it probably needs
17 : to re--
18
MELVIN HILL: Oh--yes.
19
ANNE HAGER: _. \tJiittcn?
20
JIM MULLINS: Well, in eleven and twelve I can sim-
21 ply say I'm not bothered by either one of those. I think they
22 can stand as well alone and maybe being as they have, they
23 should.
24
A:~:NE HAGER: We thank you for your comments. Are ther ~
25 any questions?
PAGE 52
JIM HULLINS: Hell, it is ahmys a pleasure to come
2 and exchange vievls and I appreciated tile opportunity. As al-
3 '.flays. Thank you. NOvl all y' all have got to do some work.
4
ANNE HAGER: Yes.
5
JIT-! NULLINS: Pontification time is over. See y'all
6 later.
7
SIBLEY BRYAU:: Thank you.
8
ANNE HAGF:R: I guess if you have this in mind too ,1-1el,
9 to start at the beginning and go 6wough and see if '.ve have some
10 general consensus for the Committee on these items or --
CzI
11 j: o<r:
HELVIN HILL: Yes, and I might -- as we do that, T
Go
~ @ ~II 12 ~1;.Jould like to point out vlhat Henry Neel had suggested as vJell. /j-E---e d 1..dn ' t -- 11e \Jasn 't1a) 1e to malce '1.t, b ut T.. spok"e "li.ntlh 111..m and
14 ~I I have taken some notes on 11m-J he thought about some of these.
III
:z:
15 011
CI <r:
ANNE HAGER: Okay.
~
16 ~ 1azM
HELVIN HILL: tIe is the Executive Secretary of the
17 :Board of Regents and he had met wit~ us earlier so you might be
18 interested in his thoughts. So, we could start at question one
19 and just v.JOrk on through and see
20
ANNE HAG:J<:R: All right.
21
BELVIN HILL:
if the Committee has a consensus.
22
ANNE HAGER: I'm in agreement to leave it be t:1e T:7aY
23 it Has, if the other two members are. Both of those first ques-
24 tions, as far as I'm concerned.
25
HIKE HENRY: No note, right?
AN1\W HAGER: Unhullh did he have any other cOrnr.lents?
PAGE 53
MELVIN HILL: He agrees that they should be left, as
2 is. He feels there is a good balance now on the Board, a good
3 representation, it works very well. On number two, what method
4 of selection the members of the Board would be used if this
5 was not used and he can't--
6
ANNE HAGER: Yes, I know.
7
MELVIN HILL: --think of a better method of selection
8 so he thought it would be good. T\Tell on the terI'l, unlike 'Jim,
9 who felt we should go back to a four year term or not back, but
10 down to a four year term, Henry felt that there should be a one
11 ~"z ten year term for members of the Board of Regents. He felt tha
.'o."..
12 ~ under the present system they can be reappointed forever and
~--- ~ they did have members that have served as long as thirty years.
14 > He feels that a person after--fourteen years is too long. They
Iii
<l( :I:
15 ~ loose their interest, they loose their enthusiasm and the four-
"'"::l
16 ~ teen is too long and he feels that seven was too short because he
oz
<l(
17 ::; said there is thirty three institutions and i t is a lot to lear~.
18 It takes three or four years to learn the job and before they
19 can make a positive contribution to the Board, meeting only onCE
20 a month. So, anyway Henry's feeling was that--and now that the
21 Governor can succeed himself, he can put--anc,of course, if you
22 reduced it to a four year term it would be the same difference,
23 but he can, he will appoint all the members of the Board in an
24 eight year term. He feels that would be resolved by having a
~ one ten year term. So, that was Henry's feelings.
PAGE 54
ANNE HAG:SR: I don't know. tacking an a ten year tenn --
2
MELVIN HILL: With no right to succeed themselves ,
3 they would be limited. In other words, now they--I'm not sure
4 how many of them are reappointed, but I would suppose a good
5 percentage serve at least fourteen years. 80,--
6
SIBLEY BRYAN: You almost--if the guy wants to get
7 off, you almost do him a disservice if you don't reappoint 'him 8 don't you? You've got to kind of reappoint him once to show
9 your appreciation.
10
ANNE HAGER: I would tend not to change it unless you
11
z~
j:
reduce
the
number
of
years,
but
I
don't
know
about
the
rest
of
o..a..:..
(@}~i you, how you feel. MELVIN HILL:
I liked J'im' s argument-. I lik.ed the
! 14 four year--
I-
':"r
15 .:
ANNE HAGER:
Yes.
I would either stick with seven or
~ a:
;;)
16 .~.. go down to four . I don't believe I could go on with ten. I
Q
Z
17 : don't know.
That is a long time.
If you get someone in there
18 who's not competent or something happens, you Immv; it's iike the
19 Judge and the Supreme court or something. You know when they
. 20 d .;..e , you get r;.....d of them I mean ten years is a long time--
21
MELVIN HILL: And seven years--
22
ANNE HAGER: --for somebody to be seven is a long timE,
23 for somebody to be appointed, even if they can't succeed them-
24 selves. I think you have to, you know, have to think of some-
25 body doing a good job, but you have to think of somebody that
PAGE 55
possibly might not be doing a good job too.
2
NELVIH HILL: Hhat about a five year term? Should the
3 Governor, if he did not succeed himself -- as it is, if they
4 only serve a four year term -- well, I guess a Governor would
5 only be able to appoint.
6
ANNE HAGER: gut, they are staggered terms too. So,
7 see he would get an opportunity to appoint a number of them
8 during a two year term if he succeeded himself.
9
SIBLEY BRYAN: I like the idea though of a longer
10 term because the Governor could be not that good just like the
11 "z~Regents member could not be that good. He could appoint a
Go
~ 12 ~bunch of political people into the Board of Regents.
~.- ~
ANNE !lAGER, And he probably ,<ouldn' t get re-elected
14 ~if he wasn't performing.
<:zl:
15 01)
"a:
~
SIBLEY BRYAN: Yes, but you Hould be stuck ':-lith a
16 '~" Board for four years of six years or something and you would
z
~
17 "'have a problem there.
18
ANNE HAGER: :It vJOuld be better than ten years.
19
SIBLEY BRYAN: Well I'm saying by having a seven year
20 term, he Hould not have that opportunity so many times as op-
21 posed to a four year --
22
ANNE HAGF:R: I vlOuld be, and again, I don't knmJ
23 whether I'm really an authority enough, but I would recommend 24 leaving it at seven years.
25
VICKIE GREENBERG: Should the total term be limited?
PAGE 56 should they be able to succeed themselves more than once?
2 Should there ba a limitation placed in the Constitution?
3
ANNE HAGER: I don't think I uould even get into that.
4 It doesn't say now, does it?
5
lffiLVIN HILL: It's unlimited.
6
ANNE HAGER: No, it is unlimited.
7
HIKE HENRY: Hel, with fifteen members at staggered
8 terms for seven years apiece is that --
9
ANNE HAGER: At least two of them come --
10
HE~E HENRY:
do several of the terms come up at one
I!I
11 ~time?
e ; j.'oa"...
ANNE HAGER: Yes, tvJO of them come up at one time. HIKE HENRY: Two of them come up at one time.
! 14
ANNE HAGER: Un hunh.
!;;
:I:
15 ~
MIKE HENRY: I see.
I!I
16 .~'~.".
oz
~~m HAGER: So even a one ten1 Governor can get at
17 :least, you knovJ, some of them.
18
SIBLEY BRYAN: I think you probably want, and I'm stat
19 ing the obvious, to make sure that it's not a political appoint
20 ment to the extent that you can.
21
ANNE HAGER: vJell, they obviously are political ap-
22 pointments. The Board of Education are political appointments.
23
HIKE HENRY: Yes.
24
ANNE HAGER: Whenever they are appointed by the Gov-
25 ernor, you can't --\-Je're just very fortunate that this last tim
PAGE 57
even the appointment of t~e :;;tate School Superintendent, you
2 know, - - He picked someone \I1ho T,']as very capable. That's a very'
3 political thing.
4
HIKE HENRY: To the extent that you can blunt that
5 evil though, I \vould think --
6
SIBLEY BRYAN: NO'] , that's not necessarily an evil. I
7 mean that's the accountability factor. Somebody has to he ac-
8 countable. After all these folks are [;oinp, to be appointed,
9 somebody has to be responsible to the people and that's that
10 connection.
"z
11 j:
l1ELVIN HILL: The Board ~,.,ould oppose, s trotlgly oppose,
e - I...ollIC 12 ~a reduction from the seven years, I'm sure. ANNE HAGER, I would tend to leave it.
14 ~
MIKE HENRY: I think that also vlOuld assure somebody
t;
:<zl:
15 ~accepting
it,
too.
I mean, just think if you were offered a
"llIC
~
16 iseven year term on a voluntary thing. It might be two days
zQ
17 :<levery month from your business -- if you are a halfvlaY decent
18 kind of person, you've got to think hard about \vhether you are
19 going to do that.
20
ANN:~ HAGER: If they get reimbursed --
21
SIBLEY BRYAN: Four years, you might say, well I'll
V22 five it a try, you know, and not be quite as committed, I don't
23 know.
24
ANNE HAGER: r.Jell, I think you need the time just to
25 familiarize yourself \'lith the workings of it and the instituion
PAGE 58
and I don't think you could go with really less than seven, you
2 know seven years.
3
MELVIN HILL: I wouldn't argue that hard against it.
4
ANNE HAGER: Yes.
5
COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, I going to need to change
6 my tape.
7
ANN HAGER: Okay.
8
COURT REPORTER: You're
9
SIBLEY BRYAN: Good,I tend to leave it the way that
10 it is.
A1~E HAGER: Let's just leave it seven. We all seem
to agree then. Tell, Henry, another year. Okay, let's see the fourth one about the Chancellor. He recommended no. Is
that-SIBLEY BRYAN: I had no checked.
ANtlE HAGER: I had no checked for four too. We all a-
gree with that. What was--did Henry have any comment, parti-
18 cularly on that?
19
rllELVIN HILL: \-7ell, no. Absolutely not.
20
N~ili HAGER: Well, good. We agree.
21
MELVIN HILL: He felt the Chancellor should not have
22 any--even appearance of independent authority and if he is not
23 even mentioned in it then it's obvious that he's not an --
24
P,NNE I-lAGER: Yes.
25
MELVIN HILL: --appointee of the Board.
PAGE 59
M~ HAGER: Okay. Number five. I get from Jim, that
2 he feels that you should not have that blanket coverage that it
3 should be put in statutory law and stand 'On its mm. VJasn It
4 that~ his main thrust? lle talked about all kinds of things,
5 but T think that' s ~vhat he really meant.
6
SIBLEY BRYAN: As much as the Board of Regents hates
7 it, I think that he is probably right, that it ought to be a
8 statutory thing even on that block funding.
9
MlliE HAGER: There will be much discussion over that
10 I'm sure.
~
III
11 ~
MELVIN HILL: What worries me is that they are going
..oa..:..
~ 12 ua: to want to retain the same language that we had. I will be ver' disappointed if we end up having to carry forward such language
14 )0 that--
I-
'"
15 ~
ANNE HAGER: Well, we are in essence saying that we
IaI:I
:;)
16 .~.. don't want to retain that language.
aoz
17 clause about 1945.
We would take out that
18
MELVIN HILL: But, I think though--
19
A"M HAGER: Oh, oh--
20
MELVIN HILL: --that they will get it back in.
21
~~E HAGER: --well, yes, sure.
22
SIBLEY BRYAN: It depends on how many--
23
A~ HAGER: Well, the Select Committee probably--
24
SIBLEY BRYAN: -- are on that final Select Committee.
25
M~ HAGER: --they won't get any further than that.
PAGE 60
SIBLEY BRYAN: That to me is the way that this is go2 ing to be decided no matter what we say.
3
MELVIN HILL: Well, that's certainly true.
4
N~~ HAGER: But, then our recommendations still go on
5 to next Fall.
6
MIKE HENRY:
That's the reason I think our recom-
7 mendations should be based on what we think is--
8
ANNE HAGER: Right.
9
MIKE HENRY: -- properly put in the Ccinstitu-
10 tiori~
11 ~"
MELVIN H1LL: I aqree with you, but I agree with you
'o"
A-
12 : as well when you said that this lump sum allocation provision
~ ~- ~~ is matter of basic governance in the university 'system and I
! 14 feel personally that it warrants Constitutional protection. Jir I'"
15 ~doesn't necessarily agree and Henry certainly agrees. When we
16
"'";:)
...~spoke
about
this,
he
felt
that
definitely
that
provision
and
=az
17 perhaps two or three of the other ones relating to Eminent danain
18 powers of the Board. Of course, they don't loose any of the~e
19 and I don't think Henry is as worried about the others as he
20 was about this one. His feeling was that if we are going to
21 eliminate that language, well, then in order to preserve the in-
22 dependence of the Board of Regents, then that lump sum alloca-
n tion should be added.
24
A~~HAGER: Well, I don't feel it should be added in
25 the Constitution. I guess the only "(..Jay vlOuld be to leave i~
PAGE 61
this blanket clause for specific things then instead of just all
2 laws, you know, existin~ at the time.
3
MELVIN HILL: Well, if you are p.oing to say provided
4 by Georgia --
5
ANNE HAGER: It's inconsistent really.
6
MELVIN HLLL:
Code Annotated 32-116.
7
AHNE. HAGER: Oh, you just put that --
8
MELVIN HILL: Then it would be kind of silly because
9 you could just go find it and so it's only one sentence or one
10 short paragraph anYVlay.
"z
11 ~
SIBLEY BRYAN: I think in t~e vlhole idea of redoinp.
.o..
12 ~this Constitution is reduce the curnbersomness of it so that \le
~--- ~have something that is indeed a Constitution and doesn't have
14 >to be changed every time we have an election on a local Amendment
t;
%
15 ~basis and that kind of thing. Isn't that one of the reasons?
"m
;:)
16 ~
ANNE HAGER: Hell, ,,,hat disturbs me too, is you don It
Q
Z
17 :usually see something like that in a Constitution.
18
HIKE HEnRY: It's certainly not good Constitutional
19 drafting
20
A.mE HAGER: That's what I'm
21
HIKE HENRY: -- to reference in statutes. It kind of
22 demeans the document, hut, you know, I don't see any problem witl
23 just incorporating a short statement that they, you knO'v, if you
24 make that policy decision that they should have this financial 25 independence so to say. There will be no problem with putting
PAGE 62
that. I think that \'70uld be a major pm,yer. Hhat it is doing
2 is protecting them from the General Assembly. If you want to
3 protect them from having the General Assembly get mad uecause
4 they have fired a Chancellor or because they have taken sor.1e 5 action ana then go on and line item them. It's just a matter of
6 \v~lO should v7ri te the hip:her education budget, t:w Regents or
7 the General Assembly.
8
SIBLEY BRYA'.\!: It's been said that accountability is
9 a bip; factor by this bcin~ a statute as opposed to part of the
10 Constition. It may force some accountability on this Board
'z"
@;;11
~
.o.'."...
that
they might not have
othenvise.
ANNE HAGl'.:R: \..Jell, I \"IOuld be in ap:reement if you all
wanted to write up say a short paragraph that you would insert
! 14 I- there and let us see the type of thing that you are talldng,
'<"l
:I:
15 0:1 about. How about that?
'';"";)
16 ~...
t~~LVIN HILL: That's fine although it would be the
o
Z
<l
17 : exact same languat)e \ve have. You IznovJ, it would be -- \'ve
18 could reduce it, but
19
MIKE HENRY: We could retain the concept, I think.
20
SIBLEY BRYAN: Let's see it though and see 'VIllat this
21 Section is going to look like.
22
ANnE HAGER: Yes.
23
SIBLEY BRYA~: To me, that's --
24
ANNE HAGER: I don't tl1ink we -- I think all of us
25 agree that they ought to be able to have this lump sum and oper-
PAGE 63
ate the l,-Jay they are. I think Vie arc jus t not quite sure hmoJ
2 to do it and if you all l,lQuld come up "Jith, with it ",ri.tten
3 down in front of us and ShOH us what you are talking ahout.
4
HELVI!~ HILL: All right. Sure.
5
ANNE HAGEF.: To eliminate this reference to the statu-
6 tory laws. All rignt?
7
SIBLEY BRYAN: For the draft for next titTle?
8
ANNE HAGER: Ye.s .
9
H.ELVIN HILL: That "Jelll be looking at. Okay.
10 We'll include that. And 11mJ about any other provisions or
"z
11 j:
ANNE HAGER: Hhat was the other one he mentioned.
..o'.."..
@;I Hf,LVIN HILL: The Government eminent domain and the powers of eminent domain. Well we could add -- ~e could pro
! 14 vide all of what he had suggested and you can ahJays just cross
Ii;
:I:
15 oll i t off.
"'";)
16 .~..
ANNE HAGER: All ri.ght. There an~ tl,JO or three that
zQ
17 g you have mentioned. Hh.y don't you take the ones that he feels-
18 okay.
19
rmLVIN HILL: All right.
20
Atm HAG1:R: lJith the understanding that then T"Je would
21 eliminate that reference back to the statutory lavJs. Okay.
22 So we are on number six. Hell, this "Jas a. hard question for
23 him to anS1.Jer. Hhat does Henry say about number six? He said 24 yes and no, it \vould just depend which ones you ~Jere referrinp; 25 to.
PAGE 64
DOCTOR CInn: Hell, he said no if it meant incorpora-
2 ting DeKalh College
3
ANNE I-lAGER: Rig:lt.
4
HELVIN HILL: Hell, Ecnry felt that hereafter this
5 should be required.
6
ANNE HAGER: \,Ilell I tllink that's \vhat he 'Nas saying
7 too. That goes along with the next one, really the next three
8 all sort of go together. We all agree on seven I guess. No
9 they shouldn't be able to es tablish colleges from nm-v on in-
10 dependent systems and he also added the other systems too, like
the county systems.
SIBLEY BRYAN: I think it is going to be hard to in-
terpret number six if you write it briefly in the Constitution.
Just because he had trouble \ITth the definition, somebody is
going to have to say, when do you stop being a system that is
getting state monies and then become a school which is not a
State supported school. I don't know hov] to say that. Haybe
18 you all could corne up ~~lith something, Hel, that "lQuld be a "lay
19 to say it.
20
}reLVIN HILL: Our proble~ is that I think DeKalb Col-
21 lege came in under a local Constitutional Amendment.
22
ANNE HAGER: Un hunh.
23
lfELVIN HILL: And I think that could happen as long
24 as we are going to continue with our local .~endments and that
25 no matter what He \l1ould say about it here, it \l1ould not prohihi
PAGE 65
a local Amendment frop.!. changing that policy. I almost feel as
2 if it's a question of six, maybe more, of academic interest.
3 The fact is in the present system, all but one college is under
4 the univeristy system and it doesn't seem to be a great outcry
5 to allO":v, you knovl, this to happen again. So, perhaps it's
6 just a dead letter.
7
Ar~1F. HAGER: Yes.
8
SIBL~Y BRYAN: The way that it is written now as I
9 understand the Constitution it establishes the Board of Regents
10 to provide the citizens of Georgia with a university and
college system. NovJ, it stops right there. It doesn't say,
take into consideration all those existing or all those pro-
prietary or see if you can get them done locally before you
spend state money or anything like that. It just gives the
charge to provide a university systeM. I \Vonder if you can say
a.nything else very clearly.
AN1'lE HAGER: \'1hy can't you just drop that about the 18 colleges? You knmJ at, "such existing systems" period and
19 drop "may add thereto colleges".
20
SIBLEY BRYAN: gut t~at is what will be done.
21
AU:~E HAGER: Okay.
22
SIBLEY BRYAN: On our part.
23
ANNE HAGER: And then we just let it all go and not
24 write anything against them doing it because there is a \lay
25 they could do it if they really wanted to.
PAGE 66
2 a statement in number six.
3
~~w'HAGER: No, I don't think so either. We just a-
4 greed to drop that out of that part about adding colleges there
5 to .. Okay. Number eight, he made that very clear. He didn't
6 feel they should be a statement in there.
7
SIBLEY BRYAN: Not a statement of bid, but a statement
8
9
.~~~HAGER: Of cooperation.
10
SIBLEY BRYAN: --of cooperation, but he did say that
~
"%
11 She thought that there should be some provisions for addressing
o...
12 ~ the issue of the governance of voc-tech programs.
~- ~
ANNF:HAGER, Like a joint Board, three from the Board
14 ~of Regents and three from the Board of Education. But, wouldn' '"
:r
15 ~ that--would that have to be in the Constitution or ~ould'that
"III
;)
16 l~D come under statutory law? It was my understanding it would be Q
%
17 g statutory.
18
DOCTOR CRIM: Yes.
19
N%lli HAGER: From what he said--
20
SIBLEY BRYAN: I disagree with what he was trying to
21 sell us. I'm sorry.
22
MIKE HENRY: I think it would probably be statutory
23 because--
24
~~ HAGER: Well, that's what he seems to indicate--
25
MIKE HENRY: Yes.
PAGE 67
ANNE HAGER: -- so that we wouldn't do anything with
2 that either.
3
MELVIN HILL: But, a statement could be included in
4 the Constitution directing the General Assembly to provide for
5 a system of governance of the vo-tech programs. I mean, you
6 know, the Constitution need not be silent on the matter. It is 7 silent on the matter now and that may be what you how you 8 want it to continue to be. Should the issue even be addressed 9 at all, that is the question.
10
ANNE HAGER: I had seemed to feel like it shouldn't be
11 "5z addressed at all. It should be in the statutory law. I don't
@;i.2.. see why they need the vo-tech statement in there anyway. is just myself.
That
! 14
t1IKE HENRY: But if they need the authorization to
Ii;
0(
15
z:
Q
establish.
I think that -- I mean that language could possibly
16
":a:t
~...
be
cleaned
up
when
they
authorize
the
vo-tech
and
all
that.
azQ
17
DOCTOR CRIM: \~o has authorized the vo-tech?
18
ANNE HAGER: Why wouldn't you then have to authorize
19 the Board of Education to do all the other programs. I don't
20 see why you single out the vo-tech.
21
VICKIE GREEllliERG: There is no authorization
22
ANNE HAGER: Yes, I know there isn't.
23
VICKIE GREENBERG: -- in this Article for vo-tech. It
24 only provides for -- there is Section Nine on special schools,
25 but that is not an authorization. That just allows --
PAGE 68
MIKE HENRY: Yes--may establish--
2
VIanE GHEENBEFG:
That just allows the Boards or the
3 Counties may establish special schools and it provides for the
4 funding of those schools. That says that the--that those parti
5 cular schools are under the State Board of Education.
6
MELVIN HILL: The point is that we heard from a num-
7 ber of sources that there is a problem in the governance of the
8 voc-tech program.
9
SIBIEYBRYAN: I agree with that.
10
MELVIN HILL: And the only question for us is whether
11
5Iz:J
the
Constitution
needs
to
or
should
address
that
issue.
It can
o...
@-- ~ ~
12 ~ remain silent or you have an opportunity if you feel that it is
important enough within your jurisdiction to recommend that it
14 ~be addressed and that the General Assembly be specifically au-
':"r
15 ol) thorized to create a Board-Ia:=J
:l
16 ~
ANNE HAGER: Yes, I would go along with that. Rather
zQ
17 : than write in the Constitution how to--
18
MELVIN HILL: --anything about the specifics, but an
19 authorization for the General Assembly to create a Board to do
20 this.
21
HIKE HENRY: Mel, don't they.have that authority?
22 Don't they have all inherent authority unless thi=y are limited by
n this document?
24
MELVIN HILL: Well, except for the Board of Education
25 giving some independent authority and the Board of Regents giv-
PAGE 69
ing some independent authority that would make it clear that
2 the General Assembly could create a new Board that would have
3 some of the present jurisdiction over the Board of Education.
4
5 Board.
SIBLEY BRYAN: I don't think they would want a third
6
MELVIN HILL: Well, do you want the General Assembly
7 to have the authority to create such a Board if they decided--
8
ANNE HAGER: Well, couldn't they without it being in
9 the Constitution?
10
MELVIN HILL: No, no.--
III
Z
11 i=
ANNE HAGER: They could?
o<r:
r>-
~--. I12 IO' <r:
MELVIN HILL: --see what I am saying is I think that
the present Constitution gives the Board of Regents jurisdictio
! 14 in this area. It gives the Board of Education Jurisdiction 'in
I-
'" 15 ~ this area and what we are talking about is kind of in between.
III <r:
16 .~~.. The voc-tech is to some extent under both of them now.
azQ
17 not clear that--where it belongs and--
It's
18
~~ HAGER: Okay.
19
SIBLEY BRYAN: I disagree with you there b~cause all
20 the voc-tech is under the State Board. Now, they have chosen
21 to contract with four or five--with four colleges and now a
22 fifth one to provide certain voc-tech services. At the accept-
23 ance of that particular institution and the Board of Regents
24 and they have been willing to give up their direct control over
25 that to contract with that school to do it. I think that is a
PAGE 70
perfectly reasonable--
2
MELVIN HILL: Well, maybe we are going back at it the
3 other way then. May be there should be a statement specifing
4 that in the Constitution.
5
SIBLEY BRYAN: I would rather specify that voc-tech bE
6 under the Department of Education.
7
N~lli HAGER: Well, why don't you draw up something again
8 and let us consider it then.
9
MIKE HENRY: It's in the present Constitution. It
10 says that schools established pursuant to this provision shall
11 5"z be operated in conformi'tr.; 'with regulations. prormilgated try the
@ ~. ~!,l.o... State Boarll:rovfrNEdHurclaLtion . pursuant tdo provisions 6f the 'law.
~
nI~
. .. :" But create pursuant to a contract
14 ~between the counties in the area. You know, if you read the '~"
%
15 ~earlier part of that, it doesn't really cover--
~
;:)
16 ~
'Q"
ANNE HAGER: It doesn't mean between the two Boards,
Z
17
~
III
Regents
and--well,
okay.
Why don't you corne up with something
18 and then we'll--
19
SIBLEY BRYAN: Really what you have gotten into in
20 is the State Board ~ allowed these different areas of govern-
21 ance to corne about. They can't do anything about it anymore.
22 It's an area Board thing, it's local amendment thing and that
23 all just kind of--
24
MELVIN HILL: Well, as a matter of fact, to be perfect-
25 ly frank with you, the committee on local systems has been giver
PAGE 71 the responsibilty for revising Section Nine which relates to 2 special schools. They are going to be ~ng this whole issue
3 of voc-tech up at their next meeting. So, perhaps we can just
4 kind of delegate to them.
5
~~WHAGER: Okay, see what they--
6
MELVIN HILL: And see what they come up with.
7
ANNE HAGER: --come up with. All right.
8
MELVIN HILL: It only came up here because of its'
9 peripheral issue to the Board of Regents.
10
Am~ HAGER: Post secondary. Okay.
\!l Z
11 i=
.".o....
@;I no.
MELVIN HILL: So-N~lli HAGER: All right. What did Henry say?
Number nine, I think he said
.! 14
tJiELVIN HILL: Henry said, "it's not related to their
15
':"r
,l)
H
problems.
He didn't have any feeling about it.
\!l
"~ 16 ~...
SIBLEY BRYAN: I think that is one of the problems
17
Czl :
with
the
State
Board
then
it
is
with
the
vocational
area
rather
18 than it is with the Board.
19
A~lliHAGER: Number ten seemed to be yes. There was
20 not any problem with that.
21
SIBLEY BRYAN: Except Jim felt that--
22
M~~~HAGER: It could be statutory.
23
SIBLEY BRYAN: --it could be statutory. That is the
24 question whether you would recommend that the Board of Regents
25 be authorized to create this program and--
PAGE 72
Ll\UNE HAGER: vJell, I think if it can be statutory, it ought to
2 be. I think we are trying to streamline it and take out the statutory
3 laws. That was one of the things that we talked about in the
4 beginning, so if you can take it out legally, Constitutionally
5 it's all right. I can't see there being a big move to change
6 it anyway if it is put in statutory. Maybe the age would be
7 about the only thing. They might change the age.
8
MIKE HENRY: I think it is a gratuity unless it is in
9 here and if you look back here in Article X, I guess it is on
9~
10 retirement and scholarships, you have several pages here on
E"z
11 scholarships and that's basically what it is. When they revisee 2
_. ~ 12 :~ that Article , I think they gave the General Assembly just a kine of broad authority to provide for those type of scholarships,
14 ~ didn't they ,Mel?
'.:z": 15 q
":':">
16 ~
MELVIN HILL: Yes. MIKE HENRY: And this would be something that would
Q.z
17 gproperly be under there--
18
ANNE HAGER: In eleven and twelve, they were both no.
19
MELVIN HILL: Well, now Henry felt that, you know,it
20 really didn't matter. I don't think that Jim would care. ThesE
21 are questions more on the nature of housekeeping. Article - - I
22 mean Section six is a very short provision that relates to grants
23 requesting donations and they could be, you know--Section six
24 could be subsumed just by shifting paragraph one to the Board
25 of Regents and paragraph two to the Board of Education and not
PAGE 73
having a special section on them.
2
AnNE HAGER: Okay.
3
MELVIN HILL: We just thought that would be better
4 from an organization standpoint. Then Article Ten might be a
5 bigger question, but Article Ten on scholarships and retirement
6 and it's a strange combination anyway -- retirement and scholar
7 ships -- but we were thinking that maybe we could move the
8 scholarship provisions over to Article Eight and the retirement
9 provisions to Article Nine and get rid of Article Ten, because
10 it really is a very strange animal in Constitutional Law.
11 ~"
Well, it wouldn't bother me if you can
'o."..
@_. ~ 12 ~ do it and not change the intent of the Article.
~
~
Dr. Crim? Is everything okay.
How about
l 14
DR. CRU1.: I think so.
~
'" 15 :~I:
ANNE HAGER: There are only a couple of other things
16
"'"::l
~
that
in
reading
this
that
I
had
jotted
down
that were
now
on
1M Q
17 =Z this sheet. One of them was about a statement beginning, "The
18 purpose of education in Georgia regarding the Board of Regents",
19 but in the beginning of that of Article Eight it does state,
20 "System of Common schools". Were they going to change that.
21 I know there was some talk initiallY when we were all in one
22 large Committee to change that wording.
23
MELVIN HILL: That wording will be changed.
24
ANNE HAGER: Will it like incorporate the Board of
2S Regents or do you think something should be put -- to me what-~
PAGE 74
MELVIN HILL: It's probably, you see
2
ANNE HAGER: It covers all education in Georgia.
3
11ELVIN HILL: The title is really a misnomer in the
4 first place. It really relates to a provision of adequate ed-
5 ucation for the citizens rather than common schools, Hhich is
6 not mentioned. We feel that just got carried fOTh7ard by an error.
7
ANNE HAGER: So it \vould include the Board of Regents'
8 students or citizens or I mean I don't think we need two
9 of those was what I was
10
VICKIE GREENBERG: I think it's definitely an overall
11
"z
j:
statement
on
the
educational
policy
of
the
state
and
it
covers
e ; i..'o."... post-secondary and elementary and secondary. citizens.
Speaks up for all
! 14
rillLVIN HILL: The only thing I'm thinking of though is
!:z;;:
15 ~ that it says thflt the provision of an adequate education shall
"'":::>
16 .~.. be the primary obligation of the state of Georgia, the expense
Q
Z
17 : of which shall be out of the public funds or some such state-
18 ment. And we do not intend to imply that the post-secondary
19 education be provided by public funds totally. Do we? I mean
20 we are talking about free tuition for primary and secondary but
21 not free tuition for the State Board, so I'm not sure I'm fol-
22 lowing the question. What exactly --
23
ANNE HAGER: I mean in here I think one of the things
24 Mr. Friedman recommended was a statement about the overall pur
25 pose of the -- by the Board of Regents.
PAGE 75
VICKIE GREENBERG: Well isn't that right -- isn't it
2 the first sentence of Section Four, Government Control and
3 management of the University System of Georgia?
4
ANNE HAGER: I think he was thinking more in terms of
5 providing an adequate edu -- you know something like that.
6 That's just what I got out of there. That was just something
7 that I had jotted down and I didn't know whether you wanted to
8 address that or if you felt there was a need. I don't particu-
9 larly feel there is a need. It was just one of the recommenda-
10 tions.
11 z~ ~
MELVIN HILL: The only thing I remember from his
o
w~
~--- I12 ~ statement was this statement in the ~'s provisions was about the best statement he could see and I don't remember him
14 ~ saying he wanted something in there.
~
~
15 ~%
David Morgan said he thought there should be some
~
~
16 ~ broader purpose stated.
w
Qz
17 ~
ANNE HAGER: Maybe he was the one instead of Friedman.
18 But I think we've covered just about everything else that I had
19 made notes on when I read that.
20
MELVIN HILL: Okay. Well we'll try to draft up some-
21 thing based upon the Committee's feelings on this provision.
22
ANNE HAGER: Okay.
23
MELVIN HILL: And we'll let the Vo-~ech problem go
24 to the other Committee for their resolution and it will all be
25 coming back to the Full Committee so you will be seeing it
PAGE 76
again and have the benefits of some discussion about it.
2
ANNE HAGER: T-low about setting a date for the next
3 meeting? Giving yourselves enough time to do all the work. We
4 come here and make a lot of work for you everytime.
5
MELVIN ~ILL: It's our job. I'd suggest the week
6 of the 11th or the 18th.
7
DR. CRIM: Of August?
8
MELVIN HILL: Of August, un hunh.
9
ANNE HAGER: Either one is alright with me.
10
DR. CRIM: Let's see the 11th is
~
Czl
11 i.oaG=.o:.
12 ~
MELVIN HILL: It's a Monday. DR. CRIM: Second Monday.
~r~
MELVIN HILL: Yes. Or the 14th. The 14th is a
! 14 Thursday. That's free for us or Friday the 15th.
I-
til <C(
:r
15 ~
DR. CRI~: That's -- the 14th?
Ca:l ::>
16 ~
rmLVIN HILL: Or the 11th. We have a meeting already
Cz
17
<C(
:
at
10,
but
if
you
prefer
afternoon
meetings
we
could
uh
18
ANNE I-lAGER: Afternoon suits me.
19
DR. CRIM: 8/12 then?
20
ANNE HAGER: The twelfth?
21
MELVIN HILL: Or the 11th, was 11 free?
22
DR. CRIM: The 11th, that's a Board Meeting date.
23
ANNE HAGER: August 12th. Is 1:30 all right?
24 It suits me.
25
MELVIN HILL: We've had a --
PAGE 77
DR. CRIM: Is that it?
2
fu.~NE HAGER: I think so. I ' l l just adjourn the
3 meeting then.
4
(Whereupon, the meeting was adjourned at 3:35 p.m.)
5
6
7
8
9
10
"z
11 j:
e ; j."o<."L. ! 14 I'~" :I: 15 ~ ":":"l 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 :::
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PAGE 78
C E R T I F I CAT E
2 I, Mary Lou Stokes, GCCR B-36l, do hereby certify
3
that the foregoing 77 pages of transcript represent a true and
4
accurate record of the events which transpired at the time and
5
place set out above.
6 7 8
"- i/ Jfojfjl~,~" Stokes, GCCR #B-361
9
10
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on July 17, 1980
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7-17-80
Proceedings. p. 2
SECTION IV: BOARD OF REGENTS Paragraph I: University system of Georgia; board of regents.
Composition and term of office. pp. 2-10, 53-58 Jurisdiction and relationship with State Board of Education. pp. 22-52, 63-75 Appropriations. pp. 10-22, 59-63
._,.-- - - - - - , ...... ........ ---~-------~
_~-~-~---
PAGE 1
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10
:I
~rl ~ 14 I
Ii
1~ ..
III
l'I 11i
STATE OF GEORGIA COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA
SUBCOMMITTEE 1, STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION AND STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT
2U
21 Room 40l-A State Capitol
22 Atlanta, Georsia
2J Monday, July 28, 1980 9:00 a.m.
24
PAGE 2
PRESENT:
2
COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
3
CHAIRMAN CHARLES W. MEREDITH
JOHN M. GRAHAM, III
4
CHARLES GREEN
ODELL OWENS
5
WILLIAM PRESSLY
TOM VANN
6
LeANNA WALTON
7
ALSO PRESENT:
8
9
10
i~
11
12 =
@rl i14 I 1S ~ lit Ii:I 111
1'1
MELVIN B. HILL, Jr. VICKIE GREENBERG MICHAEL HENRY ELDON BASHAM JENNYE GUY MR. WATTS
DR. McDANIEL, State School Superintendent
18
1~
20
21 2:! 23 24
25
PAGE 3
P R d C E E DIN G S
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let me call the meeting to
3 order.
4
Good morning. I apologize for being late. I had an
5 administrative council meeting t~is morning at 7:30, it's a
6 matter that took us a little past 9:00. Also I had trouble
7 getting into the capitol this morning, I had to show three
8 pieces of identification, get searched and everything else, 9 it took five minutes.
10
Anyway, we are going to continue the process
started two meetings ago in which we have invited visitors
to come in and speak to our decision agenda.
This morning our first speaker happens to be a
member of the committee, but I understand he's going to be
speaking as a member of the State Board of Education and not
a member of this committee.
I understand Dr. McDaniel is coming at 9:45.
18
MR. HILL: Yes, that's true.
19
I would like to introduce to the other members of
20 the Committee -- I think they know each other '-- but for the
21 record that Ms. LeAnna Walton who is on Subcommittee 2 and
22 Dr. Charles Green who is on Subcommittee 3 have joined us
2J as well this morning to hear from Mr. Vann and Dr. McDaniel.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. The young lady here?
25
MS. GUY: Jennye Guy from the Urban Studies
PAGE 4
Institute.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. That's the chair up
3 there. You're not going to exercise that option and remain 4 where you are?
S
6 am.
MR. VANN: If I~have that option I'll stay where I
7
The members of the State Board of Education
8 addressed the decision agenda that we had on June 24th, 1980. 9 The one you have this morning has some questions added to it 10 which they did not consider.
The members have expressed their individuaL views
on this decision agenda of June 24, 1980, and asked me to
communicate their views as a member of the State Board of
Education to this subcommittee.
There are ten members of the State Board of
Education, one from each congressional district. The
membership of the state board has Mrs. Pat Sherlock who is 18 from Decatur, Georgia; Mr. Jim Smith who is from Cartersville, 19 Georgia; Mrs. Sarah Oberdorfer who is from Fulton County; 20 Mr. A. J. McClung who is from Columbus, Georgia; myself who 21 is from Thomasville, Georgia; Roy Hendricks the chairman of 22 the board who is from Palmetto, Georgia; Asbury Stembridge 23 who is from Macon, Georgia; Ms. Carolyn Housman who is from 24 Athens, Georgia; Mr. Hollis Latham who is from Cherokee 2S County; and Mr. Larry Foster who is from Jonesboro, Georgia.
PAGE 5
The question "Should the constitutional mandate of
2 an adequate education for the citizens be changed?"1 all
3 ten members of the State Board of Education believe no change
4 should be made in the mandate of an adequate education for
S the citizens.
6
On the question "Should the provision stating that
7 an adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary
8 obligation of the State of Georgia be changed?", nine members
9 of the State Board of Education believe that the provision
10 stating that an adequate education for the citizens shall be
a primary obligation of the State of Georgia should not be
changed. One of the members believes there should be a change
without expressing any view on what the change should be.
The third question, "Should the state be required
to assume a greater responsibility for the financing of
public education?", there were eight members of the State
Board of Education who did not think the state should assume
18 a greater responsibility for the financing of public educa-
19 tioD; two members said the state should, with one of these
20 advocating a one-cent sales tax statewide and a reduction in
21 local participation.
22
The fourth question, "Should the state be given more
23 authority to set minimum educational standards for private 24 schools?", there were six members of the State Board said
2S that no more authority should be given, and there were four
PAGE 6
members who said that more authority should be given.
2
If more authority were given, all members said the
3 minimum standards should be set by the State Board of
4 Education and the standards should be uniform.
5
"Should Section VIII of Article VIII on freedom of
6 association be retained in the constitution?" There was
7 some discussion really among the board as to the meaning of
8 this, but five members of the State Board of Education said
9 that this should be removed from the constitution, one saying
10
I:l Z
11 j:
e ; io.'"".". ! 14 Iu:zt: 15 .:l I:l '";:) 16 ~... 17 :cz=
however that unless it was clarified it should be removed without stating what the clarfication should be, and four members said it should be retained, and there was one member who abstained.
The sixth question was "Should the State School Superintendent or the members of the State Board of Education be elected officials?", and there were seven members of the State Board who said that either the State School
18 Superintendent or the members should be elected. Three
19 members said that neither should be elected.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could you repeat that?
21
MR. VANN: Seven members said that one or the other,
22 either the school superintendent or the state board members
23 should be elected, and there were three members who said that
24 neither one should be elected, but all ten members believe
that the present method of selecting of the State Board of
PAGE 7
Education should remain. I guess you could say
2
MR. HILL: How many? All ten?
3
MR. VANN: All ten members.
4
DR. PRESSLY: Say that again.
5
MR. VANN: All ten members of the State Board of
6 Education said that the present method of selection of the
7 State Board of Education should be retained, should not be
8 changed.
9
MR. OWENS: Would that in essence then say the whole
10
1:1 Z
11 i=
..oIl..l..:
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 ~ I':z": 15 01) 1:1 Ill: ::> 16 ~... Qz 17 :
process should not be changed? You said seven, which is -I'm just clarifying this --
MR. VANN: You know, there was a seven-to-three vote that said, a seven-to-three expression, there was no official vote by ,the state boa~d -- the essence of what was said is that they believe the method of selecting the State Board of Education should remain the same and the superintendent should be elected is the essence of what was said.
18
MR. OWENS: Thank you.
19
MR. VANN: However, you recognize, going to (b)
20 there "Should the method of the selection of the State School
21 Superintendent be change.d?", and that was an even split.
22
MR. HILL: I'm not surprised at all.
23
MR. VANN: Five members of the State Board said
24 that he should be appointed, and two of these ,added it should
25 be with the advice and consent of either the Governor or the
PAGE 8
Senate.
2
MR. GRAHAM: The subconnnittee may be in the same
3 posture of an even split.
4
MR. VANN: Well, I won't make any comments at the
5 moment.
6
MR. OWENS: I was just bringing it to the attention,
7 it seemed that the-first statement that you made on that was
8 that it was the concensus that one or the other should be
9 elected.
10
MR. VANN: You realize that's the posture of the
question.
MR. OWENS: Yes. Then you turn right around, then the next time ten of them said how the board should,be elected and then they split on the other.
MR, VANN: That's right.
MR, OWENS: It's not consistent.
MR. VANN: Of course, the question is rather
18 confusing. You realize if you answer the first thing without
19 reading the second, you can come to an anawerthen, and when
20 you read the next two you realize your responses may affect
21 your answer to the first one. We didn't go back and review
22 it. This expression was made you know, each member
23 privately had the question sheet as we all sat there, and
24 each of them responded to it in writing,
25
We had discussion, but this is the expression of
PAGE 9
an individual member, and when you ask the first question and
2 read it the basic thing was that they felt that one of them
3 should be elected, and then they felt that the state board
4 should not be elected but appointed, and then they split on
5 whether the state superintendent should be elected or not,
6 or appointed.
7
Theoretically, you know, the bottom split should
8 have ueen seven to three instead of five to five, but when
9 you deal with politics sometimes theory don't work.
10
.."z
11 j:
.oA...
@;i ! 14 ... '"<l( :z: ..15 .:I "j 16 .~.. Q Z <l( 17 :
The seventh question which is not in the same order
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Just go ahead and worry about the original.
MR. VANN: The question "Should the composition of the State Board of Education be changed?", which was the seventh question on the June 24th list, all ten members of the state board of education believe no change should be made in
18 the composition of the state board of education.
19
DR. PRESSLY: Where is that on this sheet?
20
MR. VANN: It isn't. Well, it may be on the very
21 back. Let's see.
22
DR. PRESSLY: Here it is, Number 12, way down on
23 Number 12.
24
What was the vote on that?
25
MR. VANN: All ten members believe the composition
PAGE 10
should not be changed, which currently provides one from each
2 congressional district by appointment of the Governor.
3
The eighth question was "Should qualifications for
4 members of the state board be provided for in the constitutiOl 7"
5 Nine members of the State Board of Education stated that
6 qualifications for members of the state board should not be
7 stated in the constitution, with one saying it should.
8
Two of the members, however, stated it should remain
9 as is. I think that the sense of this issue was that the
10 individual members addressed it, was that the qualifications
."z
11 ~
.'o"..
9;1
as now stated should remain as they are, which I think there are some qualifications in the constitution.
I think generally the members of the State Board of
! 14 ... Education,strongly favor retaining the present constitutional
':~"r
15 .:> provision for the State Board of Education.
":'>"
16 ~...
A majority favor removing the freedom of association
az
~
17 : provision; however, as you notice the members of the state
18 board were evenly divided on changing the provisions for the
19 State School Superintendent.
20
The members responded to these questions individuall
21 as contained on this particular decision agenda, and in the
22 discussion preceding the individual decision making on their
23 decision agenda it seemed to be the sense of the members of
24 the board that the system of selecting the board and the
25 superintendent had been working successfully now and that it
PAGE 11
has worked success~ully since its adoption in 1945, it really
2 ought not to be changed, and particularly it doesn't need
3 changed just for the sake of change.
4
There was a unanimous belief on the board for
5 retaining the present basic education provisions of the
6 constitution for making it the primary obligation upon the
7 state of Georgia to provide an adequate education for its
8 citizens.
9
I would be glad to respond to any questions.
10 There are a number of other issues addressed on the new
decision agenda.
MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Vann '--
MR. VANN: Yes.
MR. GRAHAM: The other witnesees that have been
before our SubcoDDIlittee have been in agreement about
maintaining the basic constitutional language I believe of
an adequate education the primary duty of the state and so 18 forth, and have added a suggestion that in that same provision
19 that -- have suggested that an equal educational opportunity
20 clause ought to be added there.
21
I wondered if you had thought about that on the
22 Board of Education, had thought about adding making it 23 adequate and also to specify in our constitution that equal 24 educationalcpportunity ought to be provided, or do you feel 25 that might be provided elsewhere in the constitution?
PAGE 12
MR. VANN: Well, of course, when you sayan equal
2 educational opportunity I'm assuming that we're speaking of
3 the same type of equality that is provided by other sections
4 of the constitution, and personally I don't see any basis for
5 expressing it in this particular provision.
6
As a matter of fact, if it is expressed here it may
7 take on more meaning than you intend. I'm not sure, if it's
8 expressed in this section of it. You-certainly wouldn't
9 remove it from the other provisions that provide equality.
10
I!I
..Z
11 j:
?5: ...o 0.. 12 ~
~r~ 14 .~.. ':4"r ..15 ol) I!I ~ 16 ~... Q Z 4 17 :
What I mean is you wouldn't take it from the equal protection clause of our constitution at all .
MR. GRAHAM: Looking at the constitutions say from Tex~s and Virginia and Florida and others, they have put in there generally on their statement of public education that it should be the responsibility of the state to maintain a system of free public elementary and secondary schools that provide equal educational opportunity and an adequate educatio
18 for the citizens of the state, sometfting like that. We're
19 just finding this in other constitutions.
20
MR. VANN: I guess what you're .saying is you would
21 expound upon it on the theory that it doesn't provide for it
22 now. I couldn't agree that it doesn't provide for it now.
23
MR. OWENS; What is that danger of that problem of
24 confusion that could be created through this process, a
25 possibility you might have had in mind when you made the
PAGE 13
statement?
2
MR. VANN: When you aay equal educational opportunity
3 it has several meanings. I don't -- I would rather have
4 somebody to express what they think it means.
5
What I'm saying is that if the constitution has in
6 other provisions that equal protection of the law is an
7 obligatiQn of the state, then if you make a s~ilar statement
8 equal educational opportunity in the education section, does
9 it take on a new meaning of some type or does it mean the
10 same thing that the other sections mean?
"z
11 j:
..'o."...
DR. ,PRESSLY: As I see it, it would be a danger of
@;I this kind of interpretation. Suppose one community has a vocational school and another community doesn't have a
! 14 t;; vocational school, somebody could rise up and say they've got
:I:
15 .:I to build one to give equal educational opportunity to every
"'"::l
16 ~...
az
student in the state of Georgia, and they might not be able
17 : to build one. I think that kind of thing comes into this,
18 that you might be guaranteeing something that you can't
19 supply, not in any sense except in the sense of educational
20 opportunity, that is the type of education.
21
MR. VANN: I think Dr. Pressly probably expressed
22 it.
23
For instance, you know, there are some issues before
24 the State Board of education now that are arising in our
25 quasi-judicial capacity of appeals from local boards that
PAGE 14
involve the training of handicapped children in some
2 communities in our state and some areas. The number of
3 children served are not large quantities, and they have come
4 together in a consertium of two or three counties to provide
5 this service, and as'a result some child has to travel further
6 than other children to reach this type of thing, -and it might
7 have to travel outside the county, and one of 'the issues is
8 that "I've got to have that service zLn my own local school
9 system."
10
I don~t know -- you know, when you say equal
educational opportunity, if this means the same thing as
equal protection of the law then there's no use expressing
it; if it means more I think we ought to have some type of
discussion about what we mean before we put it into the
constitution.
MR. GRAHAM: Another question that, either for
yourself, or if you know the consensus of the Board of
18 Education, what does the word "adequate" mean?
19
MR. VANN: I think it is generic and probably means
20 that it's the obligation of the state to do it, but it's up
21 to the General Assembly probably through the legislative
"
22 process to provide it.
23
MR. GRAHAM: The General Assembly has passed a law
24 outlining various and sundry things. Would you say that that
25 law that they have passed would be the General Assembly's
PAGE 15
definition of what they feel is adequate?
2
MR.. VANN: You mean the program for adequate
3 education?
4
MR.. GRAHAM: Yes.
5
MR. VANN: I would say it expresses the current
6 opinion of what an adequate education may be.
7
For instance, we adopted a minimum fOmldation
8 program before we adopted an adequate program these are
9 just the names attributed to this legislation but both of
10 them apparently recognizing improvement or perhaps even
increasing what adequacy might mean, but I think it's the
real basic generic type of statement in the constitution that
leaves some of the issues up to the legislative process.
In other words, if you're going to write what's
adequate in the constitution, and that may be changing, then
the legislative process doesn't have any meaning whatsoever.
MR. GRAHAM: In some of the constitutions, instead
18 of the word adequate you'll find the word high quality, the
19 words.
20
MR.. VANN: Well, I suppose there's a difference
21 between quality and high quality, but that's somewhat of the
22 same type of situation I guess as to whether you use phrases
23 like adequate, quality, high quality. As legislatures pass
24 items that do it and courts consider it, I suppose there are
25 meanings and definitions that would come out.
PAGE 16
As far as I know, I don't guess any court in
2 Georgia has expressed what adequate means, but ordinarily a
3 court would only express it perhaps with relation to the
4 legislation being considered, to the issue before it.
5
MR. GRAHAM: I think you're right. I think every-
6 body is going to look at the legislature as defining what
7 adequate is, but I just wondered if the State Board of
8 Education had a concept that might be different from the
9 legislature.
10
Czl
11
...ioo=r:
Q.
~ 12 ~
@r~
! 14
I-
':"r
15 .:l
Cor:l
;;)
16 .~..
zo
17 ~
MR. VANN: Let me say this, that an adequate program for education in Georgia, the legislation as I read it places a major responsibility upon the State Board of Education to provide what is adequate in connection with the sections that are presented, because really almost all of them start out saying that the State Board of Education shall, and therefore I would say there is a great deal of responsibility upon the State Board of Education within the
18 confines of what that legislation states.
19
Now, some of them, the State Board of Education
20 might well desire and take positions to enact, but we live
21 in a situation likewise where if they're not funded you can't
22 go through with them.
23
MR. GRAHAM: They're not adequate if they're not
24 funded.
25
MR.. VANN: That's what the situation is on some
PAGE 17
of the adequate programs expressed in the APEG law.
2
MRS. WALTON: If we get APEG funded, we'll be all
3 right.
4
MR. VANN: I think it's probably a very good
5 expression of adequacy, but I would be one to say that
6 adequacy could change for the better ten years from now,
7 it might need more expression of some other type.
8
It might be determined that it would be adequate
9 to put a vocational school in every community in Georgia,
10
"z
11 t:
..Iol..l..:
e;~ ! 14 !;; -:zc: 15 .:l "Ill: ::> 16 .~.. a-zc 17 :
but it might not be required at some time in history. DR. PRESSLY: I think we all kind of shy away from
the word adequate. It's good and it's vague, but it doesn't sound like enough, and yet quality to me overdoes it. I think you could argue just as much there as you can about the adequate side.
I feel we might as well settle for adequate . MR. VANN: Well, some may say adequate is weak in
18 its connotation, but some might say it's strong, and that is
19 the type of thing that a constitution perhaps ought to
20 express.
21
MR. GRAHAM: Going back to the State School
22 Superintendent, Dr. McDaniel, if the board is divided on the
23 question of whether he should be elected or not, and he
24 presently is elected, does the board feel that he reports to
25 the board, or does he report to the voters of the state?
PAGE 18
MR. VANN: I think the board feels he has a
2 responsibility to both. I think he is elected by the people,
3 and I really feel like the state superintendent of schools
4 has a major responsibility for leadership of education in
5 Georgia. and I think that his leadership can have a great
6 impact upon the state board. The state board is made up of
7 laymen theoretically. you know. it's made up of laymen. and
8 therefore in the field of education some of the professional
9 things need to be addressed by professionals. but laymen need
10
"z
11 j:
@;;a.o...:.. 14 ~ ~ VI :<z:l 15 ~ "a: ::> 16 ~... zQ 17 ~
to say that this is what ought to be done. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But if the superintendent is
elected, then there's no assurance you would always get a professional. and if you got a laYman who was elected as superintendent of the state board of education then you have a problem. you have all lay persons responsible for providing education for citizens of Georgia. How does the board feel about that?
18
MR. VANN: I don't know, but personally, and I
19 think the board generally. would probably feel this. I think
20 they would probably feel one of the great strengths of
21 education lay in the fact that it is administered by laymen.
22
I'm sure there are other states in the United
23 States where state boards of education might even be required
24 to be professionals. I understand maybe South Carolina is
25 this way, I'm not sure. but still there has been a great
PAGE 19
growth in public education in the United States from its
2 inception, and I think the lay leadership has had a part in
3 it, and I think professional leadership has had a part in it,
4 but I think the two working together is the thing that works
5 and not anyone of them taking the leadership.
6
In other words, I think it's a combination of lay
7 people and educational professionals that can really come up
8 with the things to do that provide adequacy in education and
9 quality too.
10
zCI 11 i=
.'oc"....
r~@~1i4 ~ l;; ~ % 15 ol) CI '";:) 16 .~.. Q Z ~ 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH; So then you are saying in fact the process that brings together a state board and a superintendent should somehow bring together the lay person and professional; is that what you're saying?
MR. VANN: You know, the educators are people who are trained in the field of education, Lay people may be trained in many various fields, but the process of bringing all of these together is likely to bring a better result
18 than if you just have educators strictly dealing with
19 education. 'because it just seems to me you've got a better
20 process if you are involving people who have various diverse
21 and different backgrounds and knowledge and information,
22 even sometimes if you get some bad ones that way.
23
MR. GRAHAM: Dr. Jim Mullins, who was here last
24 time, executive director of the Georgia Education Improvement
25 Council, made an interesting suggestion in this whole area
PAGE 20
of who's elected and who's appointed -- what did we call the
2 term, quasi-election -- having the state school board members
3 elected from their districts by caucus of the boardsof
4 education in that district. and perhaps maybe caucus with the
5 representatives and senators from that district also. and
6 then have the state school board members appoint their
7 superintendent.
8
Would you respond to that?
9
MR. VANN: Yes. I read that. and that's interesting
10
zCI 11 j:::
.'o."....
~ 12 ~
~ri ! 14 ... :'z": 15 oll CI '";;;) 16 ~... oz 17 :
and one of his comments was that the state of Washington does this, but as far as I'm concerned that doesn't lend any validity to it just because the state of Washington does it.
My own judgment about it is that. you know. at the present time I suppose theoretically the state board of education is placed in the executive branch of government and the state school superintendent is placed in the executive branch of government. and if I had my personal preferences
18 I would rather see an elected-by-the-people lay state board
19 of education and an appointed superintendent.
20
I have been in a system where this has been the
21 manner since its inception in 1900, and it seems to have
22 worked well, but my own judgment about the election statewide
23 of the state board of education is that you're going to limit
24 those who can run for it unless you're going to make it a
25 full time paid position. and I have my reservations about
PAGE 21
that although that is a possibility, but I guess what you'd
2 say is you'd make it a full time elected political position.
3
If you're going to use that process, it seems to me
4 like -- he was suggesting a caucus of local school board
5 members in every congressional district in connection with
6 each one, and then he was suggesting from that would be a
7 choice of three persons who would be elected at a legislative
8 caucus of the members of that congressional district from
9 one of those three.
10
..Czl
11 i=
..o....
@;i 14 !... '" ::r:: ..15 .:I " :;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :;
To me this is -- At the present time the Governor appoints with the advice and consent of the Senate Theoretically this is one of the traditional ways of appointment of executives under our system of government and was the one initially, or is used in our United States government, and theoretically in my opinion this is ~- the statement was made by Mr. Mullins that this would make the state board members more responsible to its constituents,
18 and I don't know what he meant by constituents. If he meant
19 local board members, then I think this would be a mistake,
20 but if he means the people generally then I'm not so positive
21 that it would result in this.
22
Frankly, I think it probably politicizes the positio~
23 more than it is now. If it were elected, it would be the most
24 political of allj if it were full time paid and elected it
25 would be even more political. You know, I'm not certain
PAGE 22
that is bad, but I guess what I'm saying is I think it ought
2 to remain in the appointment area of the government and the
3 executive branch of government with the advice and consent of
4 the Senate, and that the other process would be removing it
5 from this field and placing it in a more pol~tical arena,
6 and I don't know whether the results would be better or not.
7
I guess I would say again if the engine is running
8 you don't have to fix it. I guess that's the best way to
9 phrase it.
10
Czl
11 ..joa..::..
@;j 14 ~ IU> :<rII 15 .:. Ca:l ;;) 16 .~.. Q Z <II 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: As a point of order at this time
I would like to -- since Mr. Vann is a member of the committee
and we plan to continue our discussions after we have heard
from Dr. McDaniel, that we hold any additional questions for
Mr. Vann until that time, and I'll now turn to the
superintendent and ask him to
Would you like to come a
little closer, sir?
Would you like to introduce your staff?
18
DR. McDANIEL: Yes. Eldon Basham is with me and
19 Eleanor Gilmer, two of the members of my staff.
20
I appreciate very much the opportunity of visiting
21 with you folks a few minutes today. and I will be glad to
22 respond to the written questions or to your oral questions, 23 however you would like to proceed.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The process, the procedure has
25 been that we have asked the visitors to comment relative to
PAGE 23
the agenda, and then we will have questions afterwards.
2
DR. PRESSLY: Charles, wouldn't it be a good idea
3 to let each of us introduce ourselves to Dr. McDaniel so he
4 knows who he I s speaking to?
5
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Right. Okay.
6
MS. GREENBERG: I am Vickie Greenberg, staff
7 attorney.
8
MR. VANN: Tom Vann.
9
OR. PRESSLY: I am Bill Pressly.
10
"z
11 ioa..=..:..
@;i ! 14 IIII :z: 15 ~ "a: ;;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
MR. GRAHAM: John Graham. MR. OWENS: Odell Owens. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Why don't you tell him your affiliation? DR. McDANIEL: I think I know everybody so far. MR. HILL: I am Melvin Hill with the staff of the Select Committee . MRS. WALTON: I am LeAnna Walton, Albany, Georgia.
18
MR. GREEN: Joe Green, ,Superintendent, Griffin,
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I am Charles Meredith, I' m a
20 chancellor of the University Center, Chairperson for the
21 subcommittee.
22
DR. McDANIEL: All right.
23
In looking briefly, then, maybe what I would like to
24 do is answer the fifteen questions and then have you come back
25 and explore any of these that you desire.
PAGE 24
Number 1, "Should the constitution mandate an
2 adequate program?" My answer is no. The question is, what
3 is an adequate program of education.
4
Number 2, "Should the provision stating that an
5 adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary
6 obligation of the state?" The a.nswer there is yes; I do think
7 that there needs to be the provision that some local
8 participation in funding is provided for. The primary word
9 suits me fine there.
10
~
Czl 11 i=
."o0.1".:
12 ~
~)~
14 ~
t;;
z<l
15 .:
Cl 01: ::>
16 .~..
Q
Z <l
17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I want to make sure that I didn't mislead anybody on my last statement. We have exercised the option of asking questions as you proceed, so I want to make sure that we --
DR. McDANIEL: The third, "Should the state be required to assume a greater responsibility for the financing of public education?", yes. Not necessarily greater for some systems, but I do think there are some equalization features
18 that ought to be written in, and consequently this would mean
19 a greater responsibility.
20
Number 4, "Should the state be given more authority
21 to set minimum educational standards for private schools?",
22 my answer is yes, at least standards that equal the public
23 schools.
24
I have asked some of the groups of private schools,
25 suggested that they do this themselves, suggested that they
PAGE 25
discipline themselves or set their own standards, and I hope
2 that that'swhat they will do.
3
Number 5, "Should the section on freedom of
4 association be retained in the constitution?" No, I think
5 that is unnecessary.
6
Number 6, "Should the method of selection of the
7 state board of education be changed?" I do not -- The
8 answer is no.
9
5(a), or 6(a), "Should the method of selection of
10
"z
11 ;:::
..Iol..l..:
@;i ! 14 Ii; :~r 15 oll "Ill: ;:) 16 .~.. 1:1 Z ~ 17 :
the state board of education be retained in the constitution?" Yes.
Number 7, "Should the method of selection of the state school superintendent be changed?" Yes, and I think that the superintendent should be appointed by the board.
Number 7(a), "If appointed, should the state school superintendent be named in the constitution?" I do, yes .
(b), "If elected, should the state school superin-
18 tendent serve the same term as the Governor?" My answer is
19 yes.
20
Number 8, "Should appointments to the state board
21 of education be for seven years?" Yes. That is the current
22 term.
23
Number 9, "Should the Governor continue to be
24 prohibited from being a member of the state board?" Yes.
25
Number 10, "Should the method of filling a vacancy
PAGE 26
on the state board continue to be stated in the
2 constitution?" Yes.
3
Number 11, "Should the constitution continue to
4 provide that the board shall have such powers and duties as
5 provided by law and existing at the time of the adoption of
6 the constitution of 1945?" Yes.
7
I would also like to be sure that there is a fairly
8 specific listing of the powers and duties of both the board
9 and the superintendent.
10
Number 12, "Should the composition of the state
\:J
Z
11
;:::
o<..r.:
board of education be changed?"
No.
~r~! 12 :::
~~
Number 13, "Should qualifications for members of the
state board of education be provided for in the constitution?"
14 I-
Yes.
':z":
15 oll
Number 14 --
\:J
<r:
:;,
16 .~..
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Would you stop right there for a
Q
Z
17 : minute?
18
DR. McDANIEL: All right.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You're.making here reference to
20 the qualifications, those that are already in the constitution,
21 or were you suggesting that additional qualifications should
22 be added and, if so, which ones do you think --?
23
DR. McDANIEL: I think those that are .already there
24 ought to be listed, then we ought to look carefully to see
25 whether or not there are additional qualifications. I'm not
PAGE 27
sure that there are additional qualifications that need to be
2 added, but if in the wisdom of you folks and those of us who
3 look at it but I do think that ought to be in the
4 constitution, I don't think it ought xo be left to the General
S Assembly.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Those qualifications, the ones
7 that mayor may not be added, should they be designed do you
8 think to ensure that the composition of the board would have 9 persons who would have some specific knowledge of education?
10
DR. McDANIEL: Not necessarily. I think they need
to be well rounded, well educated, but I believe in a lay
board and I'm not interested in trytng to make it professional
educators, but I do think we need to have knowledgeable people
in various walks of life.
Number 14, the answer is yes. I think the
qualifications of the state school superintendent should be
provided in the constitution.
18
I really have no opinion on 15. That can be yes
19 or no depending upon the conditions, and I have no specific
20 thinking about scholarships, loans and grants being in the
21 article.
22
Now I would be glad to discuss any or all of the
23 questions.
24
DR. PRESSLY: May I aj{ a question?
2S
DR. McDANIEL: Yes.
PAGE 28
DR. PRESSLY: I certainly agree with you that I
2 think it would be tremendously helpful if the state superin-
3 tendent were appointed by the board. I also like the idea
4 of letting the selection of the board be done just exactly as
5 it is now, but we do have a question that keeps coming up in
6 our committee that I can't answer, and I would like to know
7 what your answer on this is, and that is that we perhaps need
8 to be more closely related to the will of the people and we
9 keep trying to come up with some way that we will not be
10
.."z
11 j:
'o."..
~ 12 ~
~r~
14 !.. ':"r 15 ~
"'";;;)
16 ~... I:l Z
17 :
going into an appointive situation all the way, and we have been working on something trying to see how the state board of education should -- perhaps you have seen the paper of Mr. Mullins -- I personally would really like to see no change, and yet I can't deny the fact that we're moving further away from the will of the people, the direct will.
DR. McDANIEL: That is the dilenma, and I have faced it, and I'm willing to have the superintendency continue to
18 be elected if that's the best way or if that's the way the
19 people want it.
20
I have great concern about the election of state
21 board members, I think it would make it a much more political
22 officej I am not sure who would want to run for state board
23 member from the First Congressional District and would be
24 willing to pay for the campaign and be willing to go out and
25 ask people to please vote for me. I'm afraid that we would
PAGE 29
get people who would not be the caliber of individuals that
2 we would really like to have.
3
Now, some states have this and they have come out
4 all right, but I like the appointment procedure better.
5
DR. PRESSLY: I feel we have been extremely fortunat~
6 in the state of Georgia because the state board of education
7 and the state superintendent have worked together in harmony
8 through the years and we haven't had any great problems, but
9 I can foresee a day when we might have a state superintendent
10
"z
11 i=
.'~"..
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 I':"r 15 ~ '"" ;:) 16 ~... Q Z 17 ::
of education that did not at all please the state board of education, and I think the state board of education ought to select that man so if they are displeased they can say "Get out of here."
DR. McDANIEL: I agree. I basically believe the state board of educ'ation ought to set the policy, and one of the most important things they ought to do is to select the superintendent, and he ought to do what is needed to be done
18 and, frankly, if he does not satisfy the group then he ought
19 to be released.
20
The same thing is true of local superintendents.
21
DR. PRESSLY: At the present moment the state board
22 of education to me is denied its ultimate authority.
23
DR. McDANIEL: Well, you have two different kinds
24 of authority. In effect I'm an independent character, I
25 have been elected by the people
PAGE 30
DR. PRESSLY: Exactly.
2
DR. McDANIEL: -- and if I do not agree with what
3 the state board -- you know, if I really wanted to take
4 issue I could take issue and say, you know, "I think you're
5 wrong." We could come to a very serious conflict if I
6 decided "Well, I'm the one that's elected by the p~ople, and
7 you folks are just appointed by the Governor."
8
MR. OWENS: There would be nothing they could do
9 about it.
10
\:l Z
11 i=
..'o"....
@;i ! 14 ... '<:"zl: 15 .:J \:l '";;;) 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 ~
DR. McDANIEL: Nothing. We could really come to -MR. VANN: They could make it mighty uncomfortable. DR. McDANIEL: Very uncomfortable. MR. OWENS: In other words, they couldn't fire him. MR. VANN: I have a question. Dr. McDaniel, don't you see the role of the state school superintendent, even
though we have an elected or appointed or any other type of
chosen school board, as the leader for education in the state
18 of Georgia?
19
DR. McDANIEL: Yes. Yes, I do. Here is the one
20 person who has been selected to be somewhat the spokesperson
21 of public education in the state, and fortunately or
22 unfortunately I hold that position now, but I think whoever
23 holds that position ought to be the man out front or the
24 person out front for public education.
25
MR. VANN: Isn't this traditionally true throughout
PAGE 31
our educational process in Georgia at the local level that
2 the school superintendent assumes the leadership position
3 and theoretically the board and the superintendent together
4 lead education in the community?
5
DR. McDANIEL: Right .
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The process that we have now
7 could very well lead to the state superintendent of education
8 being uneducated, very well.
9
DR. McDANIEL: It could.
10
"z
11 j:
...IoI:
Go
g~r:1~4! to :'z": 15 .:l "II: ;;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There are no qualifications in the constitution tha:: state that a person has to be a professional educator, not that that might -- I'm not saying it's bad or good, but if the superintendent is going to be the leader and the spokesperson for education it would seem to me that person should be someone who is knowledgeable about education and that the constitution should ensure that that kind of person always gets in that position as opposed to
18 leaving it to chance.
19
I think we have been fortunate to have persons like
20 Dr. McDaniel and his predecessors to run, but there's no
21 guarantee for the future, and I think that's why we're sort
22 of --
23
MR. VANN: At the present time the constitution
24 doesn't provide anything probably except his age and
25 citizenship and
PAGE 32
DR. McDANIEL: He must have three years of 2 experience teaching.
3
MR. VANN: But that's provided by legislation I
4 believe. Therefore, that type of qualification has been left 5 to the legislature rather than expressed in the constitution, 6 and that's not unusual.
7
In order to be president of the United States you
8 just have to be a certain age and a certain residence --
9
MR. GRAHAM: I wouldn't believe that we ought to
10
1:1 Z
11 j:
.'o."....
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 ~ I'<"l: :l: 15 .:I 1:1 '":;) 16 ~... Q Z <l: 17 :
limit the superintendent to a citizen of the state of Georgia or something like that if we get to an appointed basis. so we can get the best man in the country, orthe woman,
DR. McDANIEL: Some states do this. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: ~ question, Question Number 14 you answered yes to "Should any qualifications of the state school superintendent be provided for in the constitution?" Other than what's already there, what qualifications
18 do you think would be appropriate here?
19
DR. McDANIEL: Either in the statutes or in the
20 constitution, and as far as I'm concerned the constitution,
21 there need to be some educational qualifications established.
22
MR. GRAHAM: Dr. McDaniel, in Question Number 11
23 "Should the constitution continue to provide that the board
24
c~
shall have such powers and duties as provi:.;._, by law and
25
.....'
existing ... " and so forth, in answer to that question you
/
PAGE 33
said yes, and I think you then made the suggestion that the
2 constitution ought to specifically designate certain duties
3 for the board and for the superintendent.
4
Would you be willing to suggest to us in a letter or
5 some form what you think some of those specific powers and
6 duties might be?
7
DR. McDANIEL: Yes, and I am not absolutely
8 familiar with what all is included in the constitution of
9 '45, but I think that if there are problems ahead the problems
10
"z
11 j:
.'2"..
@;I ! 14 ~ <l( :z: 15 ~ "'";;;) 16 .~.. cz 17 :
will be because either by statute or by the constitution there is an omission of some of the specific things, the role to be played by the board and the role that needs to be played by the superintendent.
The~e' s where you have problems when it is not clearly understood what the two roles are.
MR. GRAHAM: I guess I would be remiss also if I didn't pick up on your suggestion that there were some
18 equalization problems in the state.
19
Are you suggesting that the constitution ought to
20 address those problems?
21
DR. McDANIEL: Well, I think the constitution ought
22 to provide that there be some equalization features, whether
23 or not they're spelled out. I think the constitution ought 24 to be sure, ought to provide that every child is treated
25 fairly and equally, then as far as the statutes are concerned
PAGE 34
maybe they are the ones that ought to tell us whether or not
2 DEP. is the answer or --
3
MR. GRAHAM: Your equalization was talking about
4 opportunity of education, not financial?
5
DR. McDANIEL: Not financially. Finance is one of
6 them that might be written into the law.
7
MR. GRAHAM: We have an equal protection of the laws
8 provision in the Georgia constitution now, not found in the 9 education section. Mr. Vann and I discussed that earlier 10 and wondered if that wouldn't satisfy you. or would you like
to see specific language in education?
DR. McDANIEL: Theoretically I am greatly concerned
that a student in a rural county where the tax base is very
low has a much more limited education than his cousin who
lives in Cobb or DeKalb or Thomasville where the tax base is
much higher and music and_:art and other things are provided.
and somehow we're going to have to -- in order for me to feel
18 good that I'm going to be responsible1br all one million
19 children and their education I'm going to have to feel just
20 as good about the youngster who lives on the edge of the
21 Okefenokee Swamp as I do the one who lives on the edge of the
22 Druid Hills golf course.
23
MR. GRAHAM: Would you defIne adequate?
24
DR. McDANIEL: No, sir. I'm afraid I couldn't.
25
MR. GRAHAM: Do you think the legislature attempts
PAGE 35
to define adequate in the APEG law?
2
DR. McDANIEL: I think that was an attempt to
3 define adequate, but we all recognize that there are many
4 inadequacies in the APEG law and, of course, we haven't
5 funded even those adequacies that are there.
6
I think if it were funded it would be much more
7 adequate than it is now.
8
MR. OWENS: You made a statement -- to move away
9 from the topic of discussion, because what you said was a
10 little bit away from it too when you were speaking about what
"z
11 i=
e;1'o.."....
is in essence the equalization, the power equalization, that (
the child at the edge of the Okefenokee Swamp as compared to one that may be in some of the more affluent metropolitan
! 14 ... areas. That is a concern of mine too. Have you given that '"-e( :z:
15 :~: a whole lot of thought as to how that can be rectified other ::>
16 ~... than this equalization idea that has been before the Q z
17 g legislature?
18
DB.. McDANIEL: Yes, I have given ita good deal
19 of thought and I'm not sure that we'll ever be able to
20 completely eradicate this unless we come to a state system
21 and allow no local communities to do what they want to do.
22
For instance, if we funded the state system up to
23 what we considered fairly adequate levels, if a community or
24 a school district decided they wanted to, you know, put in
25 computers, they wanted to do some other things, unless you
PAGE 36
prohibited them from doing so conceivably then it would 2 become inequitable again, and so I don't think any of us
3 want to say that in X county you can't do something extra
4 if you want to, and that's about the only way you're ever 5 going to be sure that Ware County and Union County and Cobb
6 County all have the same education, have the state system,
7 and at least at this point in time I'm not willing -- I think
8 we lose more than we gain to say that you could not add to
9 locally if you wanted to.
10
DR. PRESSLY: You could have kind of a compromise
system so there is a minimum that you must reach in every
county.
MR. GRAHAM: District power equalization is only
one of several approaches being used in the country to this
problem.
DR. McDANIEL: That's true.
MR. GRAHAM: It's not funded yet in Georgia, but it
18 would be an approach that could be tried.
19
DR. McDANIEL: For instance, I found in Russia last
20 summer that their teachers that taught away from the cities
21 drew a much higher salary than those who lived in the cities.
22 If you taught in the boondocks, the state salary would be
23 more than if you taught in DeKalb County.
24
I don't know that that would ever work here, but
25 it does make it at~ractive for those who want to make more
PAGE 37
money to go where transportation is more difficult, you know,
2 things may not be quite as attractive as living in a
3 metropolitan area.
4
Let me address one other thing that was mentioned
5 earlier having to do with the fact that the public wants more
6 and more opportunity to select, and I think all of us
7 recognize this. I said to a superintendent this morning
8 I think that if the public really had its way right now it
9 would like to elect high school principals, I think they
10 would like to be in on the selection of more and more folks.
"z
11
~
..o0....:
Whether or not this is wise,
that's left for maybe the future.
~ 12 ~ I personally feel better when the board is elected or
(@)r l selecied in an indirect manner by a group that is representa-
! 14 ~
tive of the public.
O:zI:l
IS .:l
For instance, if the county commission could select
"0:
~
16 ~... the board, or even the grand jury selects the board, or often
Q
Z
17 : you have individuals -- if I go to you, or if I'm a prominent
18 citizen in the community or -- it doesn't matter whether I'm
19 prominent or not, if I go to you and say '~e really need you
20 to serve the city of Palmetto" or the county of Clayton on
21 the school board, you know, the business has been good for
22 you, or your profession has been good for you, you owe some 23 civic rent back to this community and you need to serve on
24 this board for a period of four years or seven years, I
25 think you get a better person willing to serve there than
PAGE 38
you would just to open it up and let whoever happens to have
2 enough money and enough friends and enough popularity to get
3 themselves elected to the school board.
4
That is a personal feeling that I have. I have seen
5 in recent years some great school board members elected, but
6 I have also seen some people who are on the board to get rid
7 of the superintendent or to change, to build a new building
8 in my community or to get the bus routes changed, or to do
9 some specific things, so I think that even though the public
10
CzI 11 ;
'o.."....
@;i ! 14 I':"z: 15 ~ CI '"::l 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
may be clamoring to elect the board I think you have a more stable board and you have probably a more responsive board to the total needs of the community rather than just the immediate needs of some citizen if it can be indirect rather than direct.
I'm not sure that anyone else in the country shares that attitude, but I pass it on to you .
I would say one last thing, then I'll ask you if you
18 have any other questions. You must remember now how state
19 school superintendents have been selected for the last
20 generation. The last real open election was in the early
21 thirties when Dr. Collins defeated Dr. Duggan in an open
22 election. That was kind of a played down election.
23
But when Dr. Collins decided to leave, he did not
24 wait until the end of his term and throw it open to the
25 wolves, he resigned and the Governor selected Dr. Purcell
PAGE 39
who came in and served a year and then ran. When Dr. Purcell
2 decided that he had had all he wanted, he did not wait until
3 the end of his term and have an open election, he resigned
4 and the Governor appointed Dr. Nix.
5
When Dr. Nix decided that he was going to leave, he
6 didn't serve out to the end of his term and let it be an open
7 election, he retired and resigned and the Governor appointed
8 McDaniel.
9
Now, McDaniel at some point in time is going to have
10
"z
11 j:
...ollC
A.
~ 12 ~
~.r~! 14 ... '<"l % 15 ~ "llC :::l 16 .~.. zQ
17 :
to decide whether or not to have a wide open election and serve until the last day of his term, or is he going to. retire and resign and let the Governor appoint someone else and let them get their foot in the door.
I think that is an interesting item for you folks to think about as you think in terms of appointment or election .
DR. PRESSLY: It seems to me the whole series of
18 superintendents here have decided that the superintendent ough
19 to be appointed, and have virtually seen to it, and I would
20 agree with them.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There's one other question we
22 have asked each of the other persons who has come before us,
23 and that is Item 2 which says "Should the provisions stating
24 that an adequate education for the citizens be a primary
25 obligation of the state of Georgia" be changed. There was
PAGE 40
------- ._----------,
some discussion as to whether or not the constitution or the
2 existing statutes gave sufficient power to either the board
3 of education or to the superintendent to ensure that an
4 adequate education was in fact provided, and I think we came
5 to the conclusion that tha: does not exist.
6
Do you think the constitution should be specific
7 in -- I guess this goes with the item you mentioned about
8 powers and authority of each of the two, but could you speak
9 on that point? You touched on it earlier about equalization.
10
III Z
11 i=
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 I'<:"zl: 15 01) III '";;;) 16 ~... co Z <l 17 ::;
DR. McDANIEL: I had an idea and then kind of lost it.
MR. GRAHAM: I think the question we have been talking about is if you have a recalcitrant local system, what do you do about it?
DR. McDANIEL: Oh, yes. Thank you. That's one of the things I need to talk about .
I think that included in the constitutional revision
18 ought to be a provision that some authority be provided
19 somebody, and I recommend the state board of education, to
20 take whatever action is necessary in order to be sure that
21 there is a quote adequate program in every community.
22
Conceivably, and we're not talking about any
23 specific county, but conceivably the local board of education
24 selected however it happens to be selected might decide that
25 it does not want to levy any taxes other than the required
PAGE 41
local effort, that it's not going to repair the roof, that
2 it's not even going to have a principal maybe, that it is
3 going to just do only the bare minimum. Now, the only
4 provision that exists now is for the state board to cut off
5 funds, and the idea being that by cutting off funds I presume
6 that the citizens then uprise and do something about it.
7
There is one other avenue, and that is for a
8 citizen to file suit -- isn't this correct? -- and maybe
9 the federal court would take over or some court take over the
10
I:l Z
11 j:
c..o..r..:
~ 12 ~
~J~ ! 14 I'"z"l 15 ol) Ic:r:l :2 16 .~.. Q Z "l 17 :
operation of the school system, but I think that after a school system has demonstrated time and time and time again that it is unwilling to provide at least the minimum standards that there must be some opportunity for someone else to step in.
I have tossed around the idea of the General Assembly taking it over, but thatis not the group; the group to provide leadership and direction is the state board.
18
Now, this of course is con~roversial, you know, it
19 does takeaway local control, but I think this is a last resort
20 measure.
21
MR. GRAHAM: Is this theoretical, or do you see
22 this as a distinct possibility?
23
DR. McDANIEL: This is a distinct possibility,
24
MR. GRAHAM: Is it a possibility that exists today
25 without any names being mentioned?
PAGE 42
Are you worried about that in any particular school
2 system today?
3
DR. McDANIEL: Well, really, no, but I think it
4 could -- with the deterioration of some things I think it coul~
5 very easily.be a situation that could say exist two years
6 from today.
7
MR. GRAHAM: It is possible to have a local board
8 of education run and be elected on a ticket of lowering
9 property taxes?
10
1.7
..Z
11 j:
.oG.o.
~ 12 ~
~)~
! 14 !-:;r;
..15 ~ 1.7 ;:)
16 .~..
zQ
17 ~
DR. McDANIEL: That's right. That's exactly, and the superintendent run on that same basis.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Any further questions or comments?
MR. VANN: I would like to ask one question of Dr. McDaniel.
DR. McDANIEL: Yes, sir MR. VANN: My judgment about something is that we
18 OUkht to try to find out the deficiency in it if we want to
19 change it, and you were commenting about the superintendent
20 and a board's relationship, particularly if they were both
21 appointed or one appointed and one elected, or the superin-
22 tendent is elected and the board is not -- you served for a
23 number of years in various superintendent positions, and I
24 don't know whether you have served all types, elected and
25 appointed --
PAGE 43
DR. McDANIEL: I have.
2
MR. VANN: You mentioned deficiencies. You don't
3 need to express them here, but I would like to get you to
4 write out what deficiencies you're speaking of.
5
DR. McDANIEL: Primarily communication and having
6 written down everybody's job, at least everybody's
7 responsibility.
8
MR. VANN: Do you think a constitution should be
9 that specific?
10
13 Z
11 ic=r:
.2..
@);~i ! 14 ... ':"r 15 .:l 1cr3: ;:) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 ::;
DR. McDANIEL: I'm. not sure the constitution, but it needs -- either the constitution or the statutes need to be fairly specific.
This I would say of my counterparts, the chiefs of state offices, this is their greatest concern right now in working with their board members because there are some boards who frankly want to administer and do administer where it is not fairly specific, where they're almost full
18 time board members and they visit schools and they want to
19 hire folks and fire folks, you know, they want to become the 20 day by day administrators, and if that is what we want boards
21 to do, fine, let's just say it somewhere so that the superin-
22 tendent then will know what he's supposed to do and what the
23 board is supposed to do.
24
DR. PRESSLY: I can speak from the private school
25 sector that this is one of the greatest dangers that exists
PAGE 44
that members of the board of trustees want to go beyond the 2 policy making level and become administrators. and the one
3 thing we have to make very clear in every school, or try to. 4 is that there be a clear demarkation between policy setting
5 and administrative. and this is what I judge you're saying 6 exactly in the public sector.
7
DR. McDANIEL: Yes.
8
MR. VANN: I would like to make one comment. In my
9 judgment that's human nature. I don't believe if you put it
10
"z
11 t=
2.".".
@;i ! 14 ... ':"r 15 ~ """::;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 I:
in the constitution you're going to change that. MR. GRAHAM: Dr. McDaniel, I have two questions. One, Dr. Pressly, concerning the private schools.
the authority to set some kind of standards and enforce them on the private schools .
We discussed at the last meeting that a method of doing this would be through some sort of licensing of private schools.
18
Have you given any thought to an idea of how this
19 might be accomplished, how you might get jurisdiction over
20 a private school?
21
DR. McDANIEL: We have considered it. and it is a
22 very sensitive area; it would be very sensitive in the General
23 Assembly.
24
My main activity so far has been to meet with the
25 private school groups and say, you know, "You need to set up
PAGE 45
your own standards," and then once you meet your own 2 standards then there will not be nearly so many questions, 3 but if you do not have standards, if you do not police 4 yourself then someone is liab!e to cane in and want to take 5 over, and I think -- you know, if we had a fire in a building 6 that they didn't have a permit for or something else of that 7 nature, and bring it to the attention of the public, then we 8 might have the clamoring to have certain kinds of standards 9 that all schools were provided, that were provided for all 10 schools.
I think it would be very difficult for the General
Assembly or the public to say that private schools had to
meet certain standards and they were monitored by the state
school superintendent, but I do think in order to be sure
because we have peculiar kind of folks in public schools and
private schools, I just think somebody somewhere along the
line needs to be sure that every child whether it's a public
18 school student or a private school student has a reasonable
19 opportunity for an education, and how that can be done I'm
20 willing really to leave to you folks.
21
DR. PRESSLY: We have no problem here as I see it
22 with the privat~ schools that are, for instance,members of
23 the Georgia Association of Independent Schools because they
24
voluntarily said that they would meet the standards of the
25 accrediting association, Southern Association, and do so.
PAGE 46
DR. McDANIEL: Right.
2
DR. PRESSLY: That's not our problem.
3
Our problem is with the great mass of the little
4 ones around over the state that are not accredited.
5
DR. McDANIEL: It is certainly possible for a
6 person who has never attended a college a day in her life to
7 set up a school in her basement and, you know, never teach
8 English, never teach anything except voodoo or whatever she
9 wants, and this is a private school, and frankly we can't
10
z~
.11 j: oc..r.:
@;j ! 14 lo:-rn 15 .:l ~ cr: ~ 16 .~.. zQ 17 ~
touch them. DR. PRESSLY: If she's an attractive person, people
will flock to her. DR. McDANIEL: That's right. DR. PRESSLY: Too bad. DR. McDANIEL: That's right, has an attractive
personality, students flock in . I'm sure we have a large number of Christian schools
18 that do an excellent job, but we may have some that do not,
19 because we don't know.
20
Consequently a whole generation of youngsters are
21 coming up through a school system that really no one has any
22 control or measure of supervision over except the individual
23 maybe who is running the school, so I just think that there
24 ought to be some way to have a: least minimum standards met
25 for everybody.
PAGE 47
MS, GREENBERG: Should this be in the constitution?
2 Presently there's no provision which assures any type~of
3 oversight of the private school system since the first
4 paragraph only deals with public moneys and the obligation of 5 the state to provide for it,
6
DR, McDANIEL: I would like to see it in the
7 constitution, In what manner I'm not sure.
8
MR. GRAHAM: Dr. McDaniel, going back to that word
9 adequate just for a minute, let me suggest a small vocabulary
10 of other words and see if one or the other might be better or
worse than that.
Adequate, as Mr. Vann says, to some people means
just barely, to other people means top of the line, a generic
term.
I'll just throw out some other words -- average,
useful, progressive, superior, minimum, quality, high
quality, effective.
18
DR. McDANIEL: I'm not sure. We us e the word
19 minimum under the minimum foundation program, and we thought
20 we were upgrading ourselves when we went to adequate as a
21 better word. Actually adequate has become minimum, we didn't
22 really improve much.
23
MR, GRAHAM: What about the word quality?
24
UR. McDANIEL: That is one that is tossed around a
25 good bit. I'm not sure whether that would be a better word
PAGE 48
or not. I would just like to have some fairly high minimums.
2
MS. GREENBERG: If the state board members were
3 elected, would you still like to see them elected for seven
4 years?
5
DR. McDANIEL: Yes. I think you need a fairly long
6 period of service by state board members and it staggered so
7 that you do not have large numbers of them going out at one
8 particular time.
9
MR.. HILL: This came up with the Board of Regents
10
\:I Z
11 j:
o..'".... ~ 12 ~
~r~14 ! 1;; ':z": 15 .:J \:I III ;) 16 ~ zoIII 17 ~
provisions, but would you oppose, would you be opposed to the term being lengthened to ten years under the theory that a Governor being able to succeed himself now he does appoint the entire board over his eight-year period, whereas if they were ten-year staggered terms he wouldn't have that option?
DR. McDANIEL: I would have no objection to that, no o~jection at all to a longer term.
MR. GREEN: In relation to the private school
18 situation there is some provision whereby a local school
19 superintendent has the responsibility to see to it that a
20 child is in a school program, and if the child is in a school
21 program and it's strange, bizarre, out of the normal realm 22 of things, am I incorrect in assuming I am right the local 23 superintendent has the responsibility to see that that child
24 in fact is being taught reading, writing and arithmetic?
25
DR. McDANIEL: I don't believe the local
PAGE 49
superintendent has that authority.
2
MR. GREEN: He has that responsih[ity.
3
DR. McDANIEL: I don't believe he has that
4 responsibility. He has the responsibility to report to the
5 state department of education those who are enrolled in a
6 private school the name of the child, his birth date, his
7 address and the grade which he's in, but I think that is the
8 limit. Eldon, do you --
9
MS. GREENBERG: That's true.
10
l:l Z
11 j:::
o"......
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 ~ ':<"zl:: 15 ~ l:l ";:) 16 ~... Q Z <l: 17 :
MR. GREf!;N: Having been involved in some cases whereby I've had the responsibility to go see what's happening and had to evaluate what's happening and report back to the state department, it has been --
DR. McDANIEL: The state department required this of you?
MR. GREEN: Yes. Well, I'm not sure . DR. McDANIEL: I don't think they have authority to.
18 They may have sent you out to check on somebody, but I don't
19 really believe they have the authority, and frankly I have
20 been barred and my representatives have been barred at the
21 door of private schools, you know, l~e do not want you here,
22 we are not going to give you the names and addresses -- "
23
MR. GREEN: If there's an assumption the child is
24 not enrolled in a school as we know a school it's the local
25 superintendent's responsibility to see to it that that child
rr---------------------
is in a school, unless I miss my understanding.
PAGE 50
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We have been told I think, at
3 least we're working from the assumption that the private
4 schools did have the responsibility of reporting the names
5 and addresses of persons attending the private school to the
6 state board.
7
DR. McDANIEL: Yes, this is state law.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: They said they would not let you
9 in, they told you they weren't going to give you the names and
10
~ z 11 j:
."o'."".
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 l'<"l X 15 ~ ~ '";:) 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 :
addresses? Did you ever get them? DR. McDANIEL: About March or April after starting
in September. MR. VANN: My memory is there's no penalty for
failure to report. DR. McDANIEL: IJm not sure I got them. I think
some other representative of the state department managed to get them, but tha~s -- you know, that's an isolated situation
18 you don't have much of that, but you do have some because
19 that is one of the reasons private schools exist, they do not
20 want to be under the control of the state at all.
21
MS. GREENBERG: There are standards for private
22 schools for the handicapped by the state department of
23 education, but they have not done anything about a great deal
24 of private schools.
25
DR. McDANIEL: I don't want to leave the impression
PAGE 51
that there is not a requirement for a fire permit, I think
2 also that regardless of where you assemble people that the
3 fire marshall could go in and require that the school have
4 an adequate fire escape and so forth because that would be a
5 different avenue than the school, but as far as school
6 program, qualifications of teachers, length of year, length
7 of day, you know, textbooks, curriculum, we really have no
8 authority.
9
DR. PRESSLY: Where does the difference come there
10
"z
11 I-
o..'.."..
@;~ ! 14 Ilit :<zl:: 15 oll "'~" 16 ~... c Z <l: 17 ::;
between the lack of authority, and yet I think the Southern Association has almost complete authority because in meeting the accreditation requirements you drop a school, it doesn't come up to your standards, and I think what we're talking about right now are the schools that are not accredited --
DR. McDANIEL: That's right. DR. PRESSLY: I would presume the ones that don't want to turn over a list of their students, that it must be
18 some kind of religious sect that's trying to hide something.
19
DR. McDANIEL: You are correct, of course, that
20 the Southern Association for Public and Private Schools have
21 a great, great number of regulations and standards that must
22 be met, but we also have a large number of very small schools
23 that are often religious affiliated, have some sort of 24 religious affiliation, and they're in a competitive business 25 and, you know, they must survive, so consequently they have
PAGE 52
great reluctance in giving the names and addresses of their
2 students for fear that someone will try to recruit them.
3
MR. GREEN: Sometimes we also think in terms of
4 responsibility and authority overlap a little bit. Sometimes
5 you can have responsibility without having the authority,
6 and sometimes you appear to have some authority but you don't
7 take the responsible position. and I think that when I have
8 reference to the private schools that I think that the local
9 school system does have responsibility for every child in a
10 local school system whether the child is attending school or
not, and that goes into the attendance requirements and so
on.
I would also like to ask this in relation to the
comment about whether or not we should be, the state board
should be in a position to look after a school system if the
local board does not look after it. You have indicated that
the ultimate authority that you have right now is to withhold
18 funds from that school system, which all of us know presents
19 some other kinds of problems. What do you perceive beyond
20 withholding funds? What would be the procedure that you have
21 in mind in relation to your recommendation there?
22
DR. McDANIEL: We would have to think it through
23 with a lot of folks, but just taking the example that you had
24 a school system in a rural area, not a single member of the 25 board had any children in the sch~ol, the superintendent had
PAGE 53
no children in the school, their main purpose was to keep
2 taxes low, as I say, they kept taxes low, they paid no
3 supplements, they offered just the bare minimum or maybe not
4 even that, they did not meet the standards, they did not have
5 one teacher in every class, the teacher had at least fifty
6 students, there was no principal, you know, and we go down
7 and counsel with them and they say, you know, nWell, we do
8 not have any more money, the board will not give me any more
9 money," and the roof is leaking and on and on, you know,
10 z~
@;;.11 j: oa..:.
! 14 t:;r 15 .:I
a~:
;:)
16 .~.. c Z <l
17 :
outdoor toilets or whatever, and after time and time and time again the group that has the authority which is the county board of education and the county school superintendent do not provide at least what we consider the minimum sorts of things for education, then I think somebody has to address the situation.
Now, what we would do I don't know. In one instance in Taliferro County some citizens brought suit I guess, I
18 believe against the board, someone was assigned there by the
19 state, maybe the court, as the administrator of that system 20 with the authority to raise taxes or levy taxes and provide 21 the school program in effect someone was assigned as 22 superintendent and board to provide the-education, and this 23 lasted for a few months until things got settled down and it 24 was transferred back once the group demQnstrated that it would 25 perform.
MR. GREEN:
~~~~._~~-----
PAGE 54
So you would prefer that the state board
2 of education have this ultimate authority and responsibility
3 rather than the courts?
4
DR. McDANIEL: I think in view of the fact the state
5 board of education is education oriented I would rather have
6 it in the hands of the state board of education than the
7 courts.
8
It can be in the hands of the court if some citizen
9 is willing to take the bull by the horns and take it to the
10
"z
11 j:
"oc..."..
@;i ! 14 ... '<"l :I: 15 01) """;;) 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 :
courts now, but then you have to hire a lawyer, you know, you have to do a lot of things in order to get that accomplished.
MR. GREEN: Do you foresee as you proceed with your design here that you would have a listing of that which is perceived as minimum or adequate?
DR. McDANIEL: Or the standards . MR. GREEN: State standards?
18
DR. McDANIEL: Use state standards, but I'm seeing
19 this as a last-ditch resort, not -- you know, not the first
20 standard you break, or maybe not even the first year. I'm
21 willing for some kids to go hurt for a while, but I think in
22 time when there is no demonstration of a real interest then
23 somebody has to move in.
24
MR. GRAHAM: I want to make sure that I understood
25 you correctly. You did not just state that the state standard
PAGE 55
provided in among themselves if you met that requirement of
2 an adequate education, did you?
3
DR. McDAl~IEL: No, but I think they could be bu~lt
4 into the kind of device that Dr. Green was talking about.
5
MR. GRAHAM: You were looking for some guideline as
6 to when or when not to
7
DR. McDANIEL: That's right, as a minimum sort of
8 thing.
9
MR. GRAHAM: Not as an adequate --?
10
"z
11 t=
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 I'<:z"l: 15 ol) "'":;) 16 .~.. o Z <l 17 :
DR. McDANIEL: Not as an adequate. MR. GRAHAM: Are there state standards defining an adequate education? DR. McDANIEL: No. MS. GREENBERG: Dr. Jim Mullins had made a proposal to the committee on the method of selection of the state board of education which I did not show you, but in essence it is composed of ten members from each congressional district, and
18 the local school boards caucus and select three people, not
19 necessarily members of those boards, but three people which
20 they recommend to a legislative caucus, and in turn the
21 legislative caucus selects one. Would you be --?
22
DR. McDANIEL: I would oppose this procedure for
23 two or three reasons. One, I would be concerned about the
24 fact some districts have ten school boards that would caucus
25 and others might have thirty school boards that would caucus.
PAGE 56
I don't know if that would matter, but you would
2 have different numbers of individuals selecting that person.
3
Secondly, it would then as Mr. Vann pointed out
4 relegate this to the General Assembly members, senators or
5 representatives, to select one of those three people, and I
6 do not think -- you know, I think that would make it much more
7 political. You would then owe your life, or the board member
8 would owe his life to the senators or representatives who
9 selected him, and I don't think he needs to do that, and I
10
..CzI
11 j:
.o.....
@);~I ! 14 ~ VI :<zl:: ..15 oi) CI
::>
16 .~.. Q Z <l:
17 :
would object. I think it would just make it a much more political arrangement than you now have .
If it's going to be an appointed person, then I think a staggered system by the Governor who is elected by the people is my preference.
MR. GRAHAM: ShOUld we identify him some way for the Governor to have more information like let them suggest three and suggest them to the Governor similar somewhat to the way a
18 judge might be appointed by the Governor?
19
DR. McDANIEL: I would have no objection to
20 informally the school board members of the Second District
21 meeting and selecting some names to give to the Governor,
22 but I have found that Governors guard their appointment
23 process with great armor, this is one thing they want to do.
24 I'm not sure the Governor would go along with that.
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Do you see us facing the posslbl
PAGE 57
situation then, agreeing onathe merits of having the
2 superintendent appointed by the board, and there doesn't seem
3 to be ap.y way out to get a board except by appointment, do
4 you think that you would rather run the risk of keeping it as
5 it is and hoping that we get a good person like yourself, or
6 do you think that the possibility of that not happening
7 outweighs the risk of the people rejecting both persons being
8 appointed?
9
DR. McDANIEL: 'When you think in terms of the people
10
"z
11 i=
.'lo".L.
~ 12 ~
~F~ 14 ~ lo-n ::t 15 ol) "'";;;) 16 .~.. oz 17 :
having to approve the constitution, eventually the people will have to tell you what they want done. I have a feeling that they're going to be very reluctant to the appointment of the superintendent without the election of the board.
I'm not sure the election of the board is the wise thing; I think the appointment of the board is the wise thing, and so, you know, you may have as much problem on one side as you do on the other.
18
It's all right with me for it to stay just as it is.
19 I prefer that it be an appointed position, and then someone
20 else will have to decide how the board is selected.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: How widely do you think it's
22 known in the general public that the relationship that exists
23 between the superintendent and the board by having the
24 superintendent elected and the board appointed, the problem
25 we talked about earlier?
PAGE 58
DR. McDANIEL: I don't think it's widely known
2 because we have never had any great arguments and fusses,
3 it's always been a fairly harmonious arrangement.
4
For instance, if you had an administrator that had
5 really gotten in difficulty with the Public Service Commissio
6 and you had all the publicity that that's had, I think you
7 couJ.d certainly
8
MR. HILL: I think a way out of our dilemma might
9 be, given the history that you have recorded of how the
10
1.7 Z
11 j:
".o0.'..
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 !... ':"r 15 .) 1.7 "';) 16 ~... Q Z 17 :
appointment process has taken place in the past, would be to allow the board of education to appoint the state school superintendent to fill a vacancy, and then to allow the election of that person at the next election, and if it's I mean if it should happen that the person fills out their term then there would be a wide open election, but we haven't had that for so long that as a practical matter that might result in exactly what this committee would like to see
18 happen where the state board would in fact appoint, the
19 people would still elect, but generally the appointments are
20 very proper, and you could have appointment by the board
21 subject to confirmation by the Senate just as you have now
22 with the Governor.
23
DR. McDANIEL: That's certainly a possibility.
24
MR. HILL: That might as a practical matter do what
25 we're trying to do but still retain the election feature.
PAGE 59
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That would count on too much
2 cooperation.
3
MR. GRAHAM: Do you think the superintendent elected
4 like you are ought to tell Mr. Vann and the board that '~es,
5 I'm elected, but I will agree that if you unanimously tell
6 me I'll retire"?
7
DR. McDANIEL: No, I would be unwilling to do that.
8
I have to get out and go to 159 counties and solicit
9 votes, folks to vote for me, and if by some fate the board of
10
~
Czl 11 i=
.."o.."...
12 ~
~J~
! 14 ~ '"<l( :r
15 ,l)
Cl
:">" 16 .~..
oz
<l(
17 :
education over there said "We don't think you're competent, we don't like you, we think you ought to retire," I wouldn't retire.
MR. HENRY: Perhaps if you had like Mel was talking about where the board selected the superintendent, and the superintendent then stood before the people every four years not opposed by anyone but on his record, and if the people didn't like his record, then you would take some of the
18 politics out of th~t, that you wouldn't have to go into 159
19 counties toget elected, you could say "Here's my t:ecord,"
20 and you wouldn't have anybody slinging the mud, and if the
21 people rejected him then the board would have an opportunity
22 to appoint someone else.
23
I just throw that out as an option, but that's the
24 way -- that was one of the options we had in several of the
25 other boards that we were considering, constitutional boards.
PAGE 60
MR. OWENS: As a state superintendent I would hate
2 to have to put anybody under that kind of structure, under
3 those conditions.
4
DR. PRESSLY: We have been talking about this now
5 for several months, and I have come to the conclusion I don't
6 see anything wrong with the state board being selected just as
7 it is today and their appointing a state superintendent.
8 I think the people still have their voice in the matter.
9 The Governor is elected.
10
~ z 11 i=
@;;.'o<".l.. 14 !.. '-"e( J: 15 ~ ~ '";) 16 .~.. Q Z -e( 17 ::
DR. McDANIEL: Just like the board of regents. DR. PRESSLY: Exactly. MR. OWENS: You just brought it up, and each time it comes up I have to make the same statement. Whenever you bring up the board of regents, now I don't see such a shining glory represented because I have a list about that long (indicating) that I'd like to talk about proble~ that I have with reference to the way the regents situation is done, so
18 if you're going to use that as a comparative idea then I
19 think you ought to perish that right now.
20
MR.VANN: Dr. McDaniel, I would like to ask you a
21 question about the possibility of intervention in a local
22 situation.
23
Would you think that the power vested in the state
24 board of education to file an action in court for the state
25 board of education to intervene and act as the local board
PAGE 61
until such time as the situation is corrected would be some
2 possible solution?
3
DR. McDANIEL: Yes.
4
I don't think it ought to be easy.
5
MR. VANN: This would leave it up to the court to
6 determine whether the situation existed.
7
DR. McDANIEL: That suits me fine.
8
Would that satisfy you?
9
MR. GREEN: Yes, sir. That would be much more
10 palateable I believe.
DR. McDANIEL: I don't believe that whoever, the
state school superintendent ought to decide, you know, zip
in and get the state board quickly to move in on somebody and
take them over. I don't think it ought to be easy, but I do
think we need some remedy, and that may be the answer.
CHAIRMAN MERJ:!;DITH: Are there any other questions
before we retire into executive session and start to come to
18 some conclusions?
19
DR. McDANIEL: Let me clarify -- I believe, John,
20 you asked me to provide you a list of something. I want to be
21 sure that I --
22
MR. GRAHAM: In answer to Question Number 11 you had
23 suggested that perhaps there ought to be specific responsi-
24 bilities of the superintendent and the board.
25
DR. McDANIEL: Yes, we'll provide that.
PAGE 62
MS. GREENBERG: And also in connection with that.
2 '!.f we retain an elected school superintendent couldn't we
3 writemto the constitution his relationship to the board
4 and alleviate the problem that everyone thinks is occurring
5 that there is no --
6
MR. HILL: Just keep doing it. I mean you can tell
7 him in the constitution that he should follow and. you know.
8 walk to the beat of the board of education. but if he's
9 independently elected he does not have to do it. he doesn't
10
~
I:l Z
11 i=
o."G."o.
12~-
~J~
! 14 t;;
<l :I:
15 ~
I:l
:":>" 16 ~...
za
<l
17 :
have to pay a bit of attention to it, and you have no remedy. so I don't think there's anything you can say or should say about that in the constitution.
DR. McDANIEL: Conceivably you could have a state school superintendent who never did even come to his office.
MR. HILL: Or any other elected official. DR. McDANIEL: Or attended the board meetings or didn't run the schools really, you know, until someone brought
18 him up and
19
MR. GRAHAM: Someone would have to bring him to
20 court.
21
MR. VANN: Or recall him.
22
DR. McDANIEL: Or recall him. that's right. There
23 are all kinds of possible abuses; I have thought of some of
24 them.
25
DR. PRESSLY: We see what you dream about at night.
PAGE 63
MR. GRAHAM: Who signs your pay check? That's where
2 the answer is.
3
DR. McDANIEL: I do.
4
(Laughter . )
5
MR. VANN: Through our authority.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You had a statement?
7
MR. OWENS: No. I wanted to make some commendation
8 here. I would just to say that I'm rather impressed with the
9 order of thought that Dr. McDaniel has put into this and the
10
"z
11 i=
o..'"....
~ 12 ~
~r~14 !. :'z": 15 o:l "'="0 16 .~.. oz 17 ::;
way he's expressed himself on the various issues, that he has thought through it and has given it a lot of time and effort in order to rectify some of the problems he sees within it, and I would like to commend you on that.
DR. McDANIEL: I wish I had a good clear-cut solution. I don't really.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We do too . DR. McDANIEL: Thank you very much.
18
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Thank you so much for coming.
19
We will take a five-minute recess.
20
(A brief recess.)
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think it is clear that we are
22 going to have one way or the other resolve these outstanding
23
issues, and I would like to propose two approa~hes.
24
One is that we as a committee sort of go back
25 rather rapidly if we can over the decision agenda to see
PAGE 64
where we stand as a committee, and then I think we need to
2 make sure that the decision agenda speaks to the concerns
3 that you might have on all of the various sections of Article
4 VIII.
5
I do not think we need to rely entirely on the
6 decision agenda, because some of these articles either we have
7 to say that they're okay as they stand or suggest whatever
8 modifications might be appropriate, so I see that the remainde
9 of our time today should be spent to provide the staff with
10
zCo'
11 j:
.oQ...
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 I':"z: 15 .:> Co' ~ 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
adequate information to begin drafting the document for our review at our next meeting, and maybe we ought to review our schedule.
When are we scheduled to meet next? MR. HILL: Not until August the 18th at ten o'clock. DR. PRESSLY: Not until ten that day? MR. HILL: That's right, unless you want to change it to make it earlier. I think that day may go all day
18 unless we would meet earlier.
19
DR. PRESSLY: I think we ought to set it at nine.
20 Why waste an hour.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I have no problems with nine,
22 we can get started about 9:15 or 9:20; if we say ten, we say
23 10:15 or 10:20.
24
MR.OWENS: What time are we saying?
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Nine 0' clock.
PAGE 65
I think it's appropriate to have -- I'm not clear
2 about how much staff you represent, but I think it would be
3 appropriate if we had -- either I could do it or somebody
4 could do it, I think we ought to write letters to the people
5 who came and brought us testimony.
6
MR. OWENS: If that's amotion, I so move.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Thank you.
8
Ma. OWENS: Just common consent?
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Yes.
10
~
Czl 11 j:
co:
.oG.o.
12 ~
(~~r1~4 ~
1;;
J:
15 o!)
Ccol:
:>
16 .~..
D
Z 17 ::i
MR. OWENS: I think so, I think that should be done, for taking their time to assist us in this matter.
MR. HILL: You mean all the people, Dr. Mullins, all the people that were here?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Right. MR. OWENS: We don,'t want to miss one that's come. DR. PRESSLY: Dr. McDaniel certainly makes a good impression, doesn't he? He's thought it through and knows
18 what he's talkipg about.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: And he had some rather strong
20 views about it too.
21
DR. PRESSLY: That's very definite, I like that.
22
MR.. GRAHAM: Are there additional persons that we
23 might want to have address these same issues that we have
24 not --
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think we -- I don't think we
.....-------------------._---
PAGE 66
have heard -- the views have not been that divergent from the.
2 people we've had, and we have sort of looked toward that
3 group as providing assistance, but I think we're back to where
4 we started out, and that is we're going to have to provide a
5 statement, and I do think that it's our responsibility
6 notwithstanding what we've heard to put -forth a document that
7 best expresses the views of the committee as a group, so I
8 would say that in view of the time restraints that we have
9 and the schedules that you have already established that I
10
zCJ 11 j:
.'o."....
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 ~ I'<"l J: 15 .:l CJ '":::l 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 :
think that we should not unless there is something that we st~le upon as we go through this that we know where there are some specific expertise we might want to draw on.
MR. GRAHAM: I was wondering if we shouldn't hear from someone from private education.
DR. PRESSLY: To tell you the truth, there's nothing they can say, because we're not going to hear from the little fly-by-nighters that are worried about it, they're not going
18 to be represented.
19
MR. OWENS: And probably wouldn't even come.
20
DR. PRESSLY: That's right.
21
MR. GRAHAM: If we're doiftg this, and we want to put
22 something into the constitution concerning that, which I'm 23 hoping we would, as justification for doing it we may wan~ to 24 hear from someone from private well, of course, Dr. 25 Pressly, I'm going to take you as being able to speak, maybe
PAGE 67
that's a good approach to it, but to say really clearly that
2 even in private education they recognize the terrible problems
3 that have been created in some of these so-called schools.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Maybe we could get a written
5 statement from the Georgia Association of Private and
6 Independent Schools.
7
D&. PRESSLY: I think a statement that the
8 independent school that is not accredited must be under the 9 state superintendent or the state board, whatever you want to
10
CzI 11 j:
o..'"....
@;i ! 14 ... 'x" 15 .:l CI '";;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
say, until such time as they reach a point at which they can be accredited, because accreditation is showing they're meeting the standards.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Then you impose by that that all schools public and private in the' state ,of Georgia must be accredited.
DR. PRESSLY: Unless they want to be under the state superintendent or the state board of education, yes.
18
I'll tell you, the independent schools fight
,
19 awfully hard for their independence, they want to feel they're
20 completely independent, but they don't mind voluntarily
21 meeting any standards. They want it to be a volunteer thing,
22 though. This way it would be voluntarily, you see. As soon
23 as they're accredited they're no longer under that, and they
24 wouldn't object to that at all so far as I know.
25
I have worked with them for my entire life, and I
- - - - ----~----
PAGE 68
don't think there would be any objection to that.
2
I think they would object strenuously to feeling,
3 though, that they are another public school that is directly
4 under the state board and state superintendent after they have
5 reached the point, but I think the state has every right to
6 say that every school in the state must give an adequate
7 education, has a right, has a responbility in fact.
8
MR. VANN: Generally I speak more as a citizen
9 than a lawyer I reckon, I'm just inclined to leave private
10
I!I Z
11 i=
e ; j...oor: Go
14 ..~.... <:rl
15 .:l
Io!rI:
;:)
16 ~ Qz
<l
17 ~
education to private education. DR. PRESSLY: The truth of the matter is that the
ones that aren't doing a good job fold up anyway, it's just a matter of time, but you've got some poor little child coming along in there
MS. GREENBERG: Also it becomes a burden on the state eventually if that student attending private school goes into the public school system whether it's on a secondary or
18 post-secondary level, or elementary level, the state is
19 responsible for bringing that child up to the level of the
20 public school student if he's not receiving an adequate
21 education.
22
MR. VANN: You know, generally -- I don't know that
23 it's been decided in Georgia, but they had this local case
24 that I don't think went on appeal, but there have been court
25 decisions that say a parent can teach his own child, and I
PAGE 69
guess what we're saying is that if somebody wants to go into
2 the business of educating children that there should be some
3 standards for it.
4
MR.. GRAHAM: This is the licesning you were talking
5 about.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Why can't we -- I mean let's
7 talk about -- let's take them in turn then we probably will
8 make more progress.
9
I guess we want to refer to the revised agenda, the
10
Czl
... 11 oa~: Q.
~ 12 ~
~Fi14 ! ~ ':<z"l: 15 ~ Ca:l :::l 16 ~ Qz <l 17 ::i
28th agenda, and See if we can't -- I don't think we need to
rehash again all of our own arguments on these things, I want
to --
Let's see, I don't think we have any consensus.
DR, PRESSLY: Don't you think most of these, the
vote will be unanimous on most of them now and we'll just go
ahead and vote on them, and the ones we're not ~-
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What would be our instructions
to the staff on the drafting, that the draft document
18 reflect
19
MR.. GRAHAM: It should reflect the majority, and if
20 a minority member might want to draft something of their own
21 they could do that.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay, Now, should the draft
23 include
What I want to do is make sure that anything that
24 gets into the draft represents the views of this committee
25 as opposed to what we have heard from people who came from
PAGE 70
th. outside, and I was trying to get some handle on how we
2 could ensure that. It may mean that while we vote someone
3 may want to make a statement on each one of these that we
4 can decide if that in essence capsules our views.
5
Is that all right?
6
Otherwise, we won't have a basis to screen out what
7 we have heard.
8
MS. GREENBERG: That's all right.
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: All right. The first one,
10
I:l Z
11 j:
@;;..'o".... ! 14 I'":"lr: 15 .!) I:l '":;) 16 ~... Q Z "l: 17 :
"Should the constitutional mandate of an adequate education for the citizens be changed?"
Let's just show -- all in favor of that -- let's jus do it by that.
MR. OWENS: Should not be changed? DR. PRESSLY: Yes or no? CHAIR}Ulli MEREDITH: If you think it should be changed indicate by a show of hands.
18
MR. HILL: Of course, the underlying question is
19 should equal educational opportunity be included, and that
20 implies yes here, so I don't even know --
21
MR. GRAHAM: Let me state when I vote yes that it
22 should be changed, I am not having a problem with the word
,
23 adequate. I think out of all of the vocabulary I would accept
24 the word adequate, but when I'm voting yes here it should be
25 changed, I'm saying it should be added to.
PAGE 71
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You want a qualifier for
2 adequate?
3
MR. GRAHAM: I don't want to qualify the adequate,
4 I want to add the equal educational opportunity.
5
MR. OWENS: I would go along with that.
6
MR. GRAHAM: So we break this into two questions.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Why don't we do this, why don't
8 we vote on it as it stands, and then for those who differ
9 you can make a statement on it, then we can come back and
10
CzI 11 .~
.o.....
~ 12 ~
~F~14 ! lV> :<zl:: 15 .:l Ca:I ~ 16 .~.. Q Z <l: 17 :
make a change. MR. GRAHAM: All right. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Should the constitutional
mandate of an adequate education for the citizens be changed? Let's just vote on this statement. All who think that it should be changed --
MR. OWENS: Excuse me. You see, if we vote on it as it is I'd say no, but to come back for a change, the only
18 way you can come back for a change is vote yes, so I mean
19 it really puts you somewhat in abeyance in trying to get that
20 change in.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Let's try it another way,
22 then. Anyone who would like to speak to this issue before we
23 take a vote on it?
24
DR. PRESSLY: Why don't we-vote first of all on
25 just adequate education for the citizens, should that phrase
. . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ . _ . _ - _ .. ~--------
PAGE 72
be changed, and I think we're all in complete agreement no.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay.
3
DR. PRE~SLY: We can say no, we're not changing
4 that phrase, and the next question would be do we want to
5 add something.
6
MR. OWENS: My point there would be yes.
7
DR. PRESSLY: Would you describe what we would add?
8
MR. GRAHAM: Yes. I think that the constitution in
9 Article VIII, Section I, page 64, should be drafted in such
10
"z
11 i=
o.'l1"...
@;I 14 .~. '" :l: 15 .:. "'~" 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
a way that it includes the provision for equal educational opportunity, and I would suggest that the drafters make a provision in there that first recognizes the importance of education in the state of Georgia. I don't think that's recognized in Paragraph I .
For example, in the Texas constitution it says that knowledge, self reliance and an understanding of the democratic process being safeguards of liberty and the
18 bulwark of free and open g>vernment, the state of -- and here
19 Georgia shall maintain a system of free public elementary
20 and secondary schools that provide an adequate education
21 for the citizens and that provide equal educational programs
22 for every child of school age throughout the state.
23
Now, I want to answer Mr. Vann' s question about what
24 I think equality of educational opportunity means, to go back
25 to your firstqlestion.
PAGE 73
I think we need in education a general statement
2 of principle that pertains to the quality of educational
3 opportunity, first because it is impossible for constitutional
4 framers, i.e., us to contemplate a variety of unjustifiable
5 inequalities which might deny access to educational services
6 and facilities. We can't sit here and make up a list of
7 inequalities that are not justifiable that would deny a child
8 access to educational services and facilities that may arise
9 in the future, so I think the term equality of educational
10
e ; ;."z 11 j: .'o.".
! 14 I':-"<rl
15 .:.
":'>"
16 .~.. Q Z .cl:
17 :
opportunity or equal educational opportunity in itself is going to leave the course of legislation and the courts open there for a lot of things, but it's going to recognize that education is fundamental, that the only way there can ever be inequalities in educational opportunity would have to be based upon a rational educationally required criteria, and I want that to be very clear, I don't think that a child can be denied educational opportunity in this state because of
18 his race, his religion, his personal property wealth, the
19 personal property wealth of his parents, the wealth of the
20 school district that he happens to live in, the poverty of
21 the school districts that he happens to live in, the sex,
22 national origin, and I think our constitution needs to make
23 absolutely clear that the only way we can ever have any
24 inequalities in this state of educational opportunity would
25 have to be based upon rational educationally related
r r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
PAGE 74
criteria, and by spelling out that we want equal educational
2 opportunity we are telling them that the only time it can
3 ever be unequal is if there's a rational educationally related
4 criteria that might make it that way, and this goes back to
5 the legal provisions of what is meant by fundamental.
6
I want a court some time in the future, or a
7 legislature some time in the future to say those constitutiona
8 framers recognized it might be impossible some time down the
9 road to know what is an equal educational opportunity, but
10 they told us very clearly that education is fundamental, that
CzI 11 j:
.'oG."o.
@;I
the only way you can not have educational opportunity that's equal is because of educationally -- educational criteria based upon educational reasons, and they absolutely and once
! 14 t;
and for all eliminated any thought that anybody might have
:z:
15 .l) that the type of education a person gets in this state is
CI
'";;;)
16 ~... based upon their race, their color, their personal wealth,
Q
Z
17 : the property wealth of where they happen to live, their
18 national origin or their religion or any sex.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We're talking about
20
DR. PRESSLY: Excuse me. Go ahead.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I understand exactly what you're
22 saying, and I was wondering if we talked about equal access
23 guarantee for all would be a lot clearer than equal
24 opportunity, equal educational opportunity, because I --
25 I'm just trying that out.
PAGE 75
MR. GRAHAM: I'm not sure in the state of Georgia 2 at all whether the equal protection laws do this. I hope 3 that they do, and I think we have found case support for 4 that and strong support throughout the country for that issue, 5 but the argument comes back and is coming back, well, if you 6 talk about equalization of educational opportunity what makes 7 it so different from the equalization of garbage collection, 8 and that depends on the wealth of the school district where 9 you live whether you get garbage collection paid for by 10 property taxes in the county or not, but equalization of
police protection, equalization of health services, equalization of other things -- I think we have an opportunity now to specify we're not saying that those aren't necessary things, but we're really saying that education is fundamental, it's fundamental to the democratic process of the state, it's the most important thing that I think a person can invest in for their own child, and I think it's the most 18 important thing the state can" invest in and ensure for the 19 children of the state, because children are being harmed in 20 this state right now because they're denied equal educational 21 opportunity, but the opportunity that exists on any number 22 of reasons, but the constitutional framers don't have to 23 spell out what those inequalities are, they just need to say 24 that this state will not tolerate this, and that's why I 25 think it ought to be added to the term adequate.
PAGE 76
DR. PRESSLY: John, I couldn't agree more with
2 everything you're saying, but to me adequate education for
3 the citizens does exactly what you're saying.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Yes?
5
MR. OWENS: As we have said over and over again,
6 the word adequate in itself is difficult to define in any
7 kind of specific setting, therefore to further elucidate what
8 is meant by it and to further clarify the whole meaning of
9 what we're trying to bring out you need more of this kind of
10
1:1
.Z
11 j:
..o....
12 ~
@rl ! 14 ... '" :r .. 15 .:I 1:1
;:)
16 .~.. Q Z
17 ::;
added rationale in order to further explain what is being said .
As far as in the other part of the constitution, true, it's there. but many times, and most of you who have dealt with it in education and law, and as you said be.fore that if it's brought up in another section, in another place you say that does not deal with this, we're speaking of this area of the thing, but when this information is
18 within the area of the section or article itself dealing
19 with the specific thing we're dealing with, and this is
20 education, then it addresses itself, and if it is added or
21 doubled in another place I can see only that it adds
22 impetus to what the idea of the other place happens to be.
23
MR. VANN: It seems to me like we're overlooking
24 all of the words of this provision and we're dealing with
25 adequate education for the citizens, because. you know. it
PAGE 77
says the provision of an adequate education for the citizens
2 shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia.
3
Now, to me when it says the provision it must be
4 including within it -- at least I'll express it myself --
5 that the opportunity must be a part of a provision of an
6 adequate education.
7
In the first place we can't isolate adequate, we've
8 got to say adequate education. I suspect that all of us
9 would have a difficult time defining education too because
10 it covers the whole gamut of man's experience and it might
"z
9 ; ;11
I-
..'o"....
cover the gamut of man's experience in the years to come
which are different from man's experience today.
And then it says for the citizens. Now, if there
! 14 I-
is any inequality in the word citizens, what is it?
I suppose
'"
:I:
15 o!l you might say it eliminates what, aliens? But certainly
"'"::I
16 ~... citizens would include women, blacks, whites, all nationalitiel
oz
17 ::; all sexes, all persons of any type of origin. It just
18 doesn't seem to me that it expresses an inequality.
19
MR. GRAHAM: Let me go back --
20
MR. VANN: Let me say one other thing, shall be a
21 primary obligation. I think by placing the word primary
22 here in the constitution and in this provision of the
23 constitution that it's speaking about the whole gamut of
24 government, that the provision of an adequate education for
25 the citizens shall be a primary obligation, it's the first
PAGE 78
1 . obligation of the government of the state of Georgia, and
2 I really think that it expresses well -- we may not have any
3 court decisions on it, but it expresses well both opportunity,
4 both equality, and bothfue primacy of the obligation of the
5 state of Georgia.
6
Now, to me equal educational opportunity in some
7 context we're speaking of almost deals with finance. Well,
8 I would be the first to say that everybody ought to have an
9 equal educational opportunity from a financial viewpoint
10
.. 1I ";z: ..o....
@;I ! 14 t:r; ..IS .:> " ;;;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 :
whether they're poor or rich or medium and that the state shouldn't distinguish in this way, but in some respects we're speaking then of the fact that -- you know, I'm very much like Dr. McDaniel, if you want to provide this just eliminate any local dollars whatsoever or give credit for it on state, you know, just state finance the whole thing, don't give any opportunity for local systems to do anything .
It would probably be a big boon to private
18 education, Dr. Pressly.
19
DR. PRESSLY: It surely would.
20
MR. VANN: My judgment of it is that I don't know
21 what we're trying to add when we say adequate educational
22 opportunity, because you're not trying to eliminate what
23 we've got.
24
MR. GRAHAM: I think we have unequal educational
25 opportunity in the state of Georgia.
PAGE 79
MR. VANN: Is that --
2
MR. GRAHAM: Harmful,to the children.
3
MR. VANN: Are you saying then that we should leave
4 this -- how would you say that this section of the
5 constitution is put into force and effect?
6
MR. GRAHAM: I'm arguing in the lawsuit exactly
7 what you said, this provides that --
8
MR. VANN: That's right.
9
MR. GRAHAM: My question is, in the Rodriguez case
10
Czl 11 ...
'o.."....
~ 12 ~
~F~! 14 ...... :-cr 15 ol) I:l '":;) 16 .~.. oz -c 17 :
in Texas the United States Supreme Court contrary to Brown versus Board of Education and maybe in a decision that I agree with in a lot of ways has said that education was not a fundamental obligation of the federal government.
MR. VANN: Obligation of the federal government MR. GRAHAM: And I may agree with that. They said -- and I always read the Rodriguez case -- let's go back to your own state, look at your state constitution and find out
18 what education is in your state, what does it say?
19
Then I was glad to hear what you said about the
20 state of Washington because I don't much like the state of
21 Washington either because the education provision in the 22 state of Washington didn't say anything about equal 23 educational opportunity, and the State Supreme Court of 24 Washington said education is not fundamental in the state 25 of Washington, and contrary to every other state where this
PAGE 80
case has been brought up they, the supreme court there
2 knocked it down because the education provision didn't say
3 that.
4
Now, we can compromise on this to the extent that I
5 think maybe if you added the words and fundamental after
6 primary
7
MR. VANN: What does primary mean?
8
MR. GRAHAM: I argue it means first.
9
MR. VANN: What does fundamental mean? Do you put
10
..e"
Z
11 j:
e ; i..o.... ! 14 ... ':"r .15 .:> e" ;;;) 16 ~... zQ
17 :
a bottom on something? MR. GRAHAM: I think there's a distinction there,
Mr. Vann. I think we really need to recognize in an educational provision of a state constitution the importance of education, and I don't think we ought to try to read into some words what it means, I think we ought to say it.
MR. VANN: What, in the constitution? For instance, do you think we ought to say in the constitution what due
18 process of law is?
19
MR. GRAHAM: No, but I think we ought to say
20 education is important.
21
MR.. VANN: We ought tosay in the constitution what
22 equal protection of law is?
23
MR. GRAHAM: I think the constitution ought to state
24 that no child in this state will be denied an equal
25 educational opportunity.
PAGE 81
MR. VANN: I think,it states it.
2
DR. PRESSLY: I have a little difficulty with that
3 statement. I agree with everything you're Siying whole-
4 heartedly, but I think it is covered here as we were just
5 saying, but I worry about equal educational opportunity.
6 Suppose you had a situation like this, suppose a family
7 lives down in a rural community and the school in that rural
8 community as it ought to be is largely vocational, but it 9 has liberal arts courses so if a child wants to go to
10
Czl
.11 j: .'o.".
9;1 14 ~ ~ ':"r 15 .:l Cl '"::> 16 ;... Q Z 17 ::i
college he can, but those liberal arts courses are not equal to the liberal arts courses given at say Druid Hills High School. Are the people in that county going to be forced to have a school that has equal educational opportunity in the liberal arts when that is not what that community really needs? They've got an adequate one, but to sayan equal opportunity, that child doesn't have an equal opportunity with a child over in Druid Hills, there's no question about
18 it.
19
MR. GRAHAM: The situation is, and I've spent five
20 years in talking to almost every school superintendent in the
21 state and looking at children, they're saying that we have a
22 denial of equal educational opportunity and the children are
23 being harmed in this state, and whether
24
DR. PRESSLY: Isn't that because they're not getting
25 an adequate education, and we have covered it.
rr----------------
PAGE 82 -- ._--_._-----------,
MR. VANN: It's basically because of dollars.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let me try something out that
3 the staff drafted.
4
Paragraph I, Public Education
5
MR. HILL: I've got a copy of it here.
6
MR. GRAHAM: I think we all recognize and agree that
7 education is important. I'm just trying to see if we can't
8
DR. PRESSLY: We agree with you wholeheartedly.
9
MR. GRAHAM: -- if we can't put some more language
10
.."z
11 j:
..o.....
@;~ ! 14 IU<:zI: ".15 ~ ::;) 16 ~... Q Z < 17 ::
in here so another group some time down the line will know exactly what we're thinking about instead of saying '~ell, maybe they thought primary meant first."
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: "The provision of an adequate education for the citizens in a manner that promotes equal educational opportunity shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia, the expense of which shall be borne out of public funds. The
18
General Assembly shall see that this obligation is
19
met and shall by taxation or otherwise provide for
20
public funds for such purpose and may prescribe the
21
terms and conditions upon which state funds shall be
22
made available therefor."
23
MR. HILL: You see, I think the problem with what
24 you're saying is if you try to ensure it in every level
25 then you're going to run into the problem that Dr. Pressly
PAGE 83
is speaking of where if one person gets a better education
2 than someone else or has a higher level then maybe it would
3 be thought that it's not equal, so the reason that I didn't
4 say shall ensure that an equal educational opportunity is
5 provided is because we can't really be sure where that goes.
6
MR. GRAHAM: In the law if you have a provision for
7 equal educational opportunity in the educational provision
8 then the only way you could justify inequalities is through
9 some educational criteria. You can always do this. They do
10
"z
11 I-
@;;.'oa".... ! 14 !:z;;: 15 ~ "'":) 16 ~ :;) z 17 :
this in a number of cases in the United States, and the state Supreme Court says "Is it fundamental or not," and then all I think we need to say is that we shall have equal educational opportunity, and if we don't have it and it's because of something not related to education then it's wrong.
MR. OWENS: In Washington when they use the term that education was not fundamental, what definition or idea
18 did they give for fundamental?
19
MR. GRAHAM: It wasn't mentioned in the constitution
20
MR. OWENS: They didn't involve fundamental as to
21 what--
22
MR. GRAHAM: They didn't mention education in the
23 constitution.
24
DR. PRESSLY: John, can you buy the statement that's
25 here?
PAGE 84
MR. GRAHAM: I'm not sure I agree that we (ought to
2 promote equal educational opportunity. I think the provision
3 of an adequate education for the citizens in a manner that
4 produces equal educational opportunity, or is equal, or 5 provides
6
DR. PRESSLY: I don't believe we will ever have
7 equal educational opportunity myself.
8
MR, OWENS: We must work toward that idea.
9
MR. GRAHAM: Whether we have equal protection of the
10 law is a question that's argued in the courts every day.
Czl 11 ~
@;;oo....r..:
DR. PRESSLY: I don't believe that a child in the Druid Hills High School is getting an equal vocational opportunity as the child in some of our rural schools is
! 14 I-
getting, I don't think he needs it, it isn't there.
'<"l
J:
15 .:I
MR. GRAHAM: Why doesn't he need it in a highly
Cl
or:
:::l
16 ~... mobile society like we have now?
Q
Z
<l
17 :
DR. PRESSLY: That's not his field.
18
MR. GRAHAM: That's not his choice. He just happens
19 to live there.
20
DR. PRESSLY: I don't see how we can say Druid Hills
21 has got to provide this.
22
MR. GRAHAM: We're not saying this, we're saying
23 equal educational opportunities can't be denied because of
24 irrational criteria. As far as education goes, there may be
25 educational reasons why there should be differences, and they
PAGE 85
would be valid, but there can be no other reason outside of
2 education why there shouldn't be equal educational
3 opportunities.
4
!JR. PRESSLY: You know a whole lot more about the
5 law than I do, but my guess would be there could be suit
6 after suit that would say that this school or that school
7 is not giving us equal in this particular area and they must
8 do it.
9
MR. GRAHAM: If there's an educational 'reason for
10
"z
11 j:
.l'o>."..
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 ... '~ :"r 15 .:l "'"::) 16 .~.. Q Z ~ 17 :i
not, then they won't win the suit. MR. HENRY: Would you say the vocational education
they provide in Okefenokee County and the liberal arts education they provide in !JeKalb County, are you argui~g the Okefenokee County school board attorney could say that there was a rational reason for that or a compelling reason?
MR. GRAHAM: You would argue that based upon the sqciety in which they are being trained that the one rural,
18 one urban and so forth
19
I am totally opposed to equal dollars per. student
20 throughout the state, that won't work, All I'm saying is
21 we should have nothing that would ever stop educational 22 opportunity being equal unless it's educationally related, 23 and right now as the basis of a lawsuit the type of education 24 a child in this state gets depends upon theproperty wealth 25 of where he happens to live, and that's like saying count
r r - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - . - -..
PAGE 86
the number of telephone poles in your county and if you've
2 got more than that you get a better opportunity. There is
3 no rational reason why a child should be denied the oppor-
4 tunity just simply based upon the wealth of where he happens 5 to live.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let's see where we are.
7
MR. GRAHAM: I don't want to argue the case, because
8 I think I could probably buy this -- I would rather go back to
9 exactly what we have here and add the words fundamental
10 after primary.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Then that would satisfy equal
opportunity.
MR. GRAHAM: It would lend more weight to it I
I
think.
MS. GREENBERG: Webster's dictionary states that
fundamental and primary are synonymous if you want to talk
about plain meaning.
18
MR. GRAHAM: Then I would take out primary and put
19 fundamental, because courts talk in terms of fundamental and
20 not primary.
21
MR. VANN: The courts would have to talk in terms of
22 primary in Georgia.
23
MR. GRAHAM: Yeah.
24
MR. WATTS: In terms of the inability to specificall
25 define what adequate is which is an underlying problem in
PAGE 87
this area of discussion, the state board it's my under-
2 standing is involved in a process that is in effect defining
3 adequate, that is the production of a set of standards which
4 are minimum standards.
5
MR. GRAHAM: The standards are not adequate. You
6 won't find anybody on the state board that would say that,
7 or the superintendent
8
MR. WATTS: That could be a vehicle by which adequat~
9 is more accurately defined than just the word adequate.
10
"z
II t-
.oo.<.
12 ~
~~F~ ~ ! 14 tv> % 15 .:J "0< :> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
I think the legislature in its legislation defines adequate better than that in APEG.
MR. VANN: The way I see it is just like I've said that adequate may mean something for today and something different for tomorrow, because it has in Georgia I guess, or else no one has attacked it.
I don't think the courts are going to sit down here and say that you've got to do A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H to
18 be adequate. I think they will look at the legislation and
19 determine whether this comes within the constitutional
20 requirement of an adequate education for the citizens of
21 Georgia being a primary obligation, and if they held what we
22 were doing was not adequate it means we'd have to do something
23 else.
24
MR. GRAHAM: Are you saying that it's impossible
25 for it to be adequate unless it's equal?
PAGE 88
MR. VANN: I think it's
No, I'm not saying
2 that, I say I think it's possible to be adequate today and
3 inadequate tomorrow.
4
MR. GRAHAM: 1bere are two issues involved.
5 Adequate is one,issue, and the other is whether or not we are
6 providing equal educational opportunity in the state. They
7 are two different things.
8
MR. VANN: If you're speaking about dollars -- for
9 instance, you used the words at one point in yours equal
10
CzI
.11 j: 'o."..
~r~ ~\ ~ 12
! 14 tOIl :r
15 .:l
CI
'";:)
16 ~... Q Z
17 :
educational programs. MR. GRAHAM: I meant to say opportunities. MR. VANN: Well,what is opportunity except
you mean access to? MR. GRAHAM: Right . MR.. VANN: You know, to me you might comply with
that by putting all the schools in Georgia in Atlanta and providing people with money to come here.
18
DR. P~SSLY: . John, what I'm having difficulty with
19 in what you're trying to get at was you're trying to
20 accomplish -- I couldn't agree with you more, I agree with it
21 a hundred percent, but I don't see is why doesn't the word
22 adequate education for the citizens assure equal educational
23 opportunity?
24
MR. GRAHAM: Why don't we say that?
25
DR. PRESSLY: I don't mind saying it myself.
PAGE 89
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: To ensure adequate education?
2 To ensure?
3
MS. GREENBERG: Could I try some language out?
4
The state of Georgia shall assure its citizens of an
5 adequate education and shall provide its citizens with access
6 to equal educational opportunities. Is that too strong?
7
MR. GRAHAM: I think that would be fine.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Read it again.
9
MS. GREENBERG: The state of Georgia
10
1.7 Z
11 I-
.'o"
Q.
9;1 ! 14 I'" ::I: 15 .:l 1.7 :'>" 16 ~ Q Z 17 :
MR. GRAHAM: Where are you reading from? MS. GREENBERG: I just wrote it. The state of Georgia shall assure its citizens of an adequate education and shall provide its citizens with access tc equal educational opportunities. MR. VANN: I think we're trying to add some meaning to the constitution, we just must be doing that -MR. HILL: You see, the problem is, though, what's
18 being stated is that under the present language we have we do
19 not have equal educational opportunity.
20
MR. VANN: You can say the same thing just the
21 opposite, under the present language we do have an equal
22 educational opportunity.
23
MR. GRAHAM: Let me add three words.
24
MR. HILL: What John is saying about the difference
25 in wealth, and we heard testimony from Clark Stevens about
PAGE 90
the amount of money that's going into education and the
2 variation between counties, and it would be very hard to
3 based on those figures to have it.
4
MR. VANN: Maybe if the legislature under its
5 constitutional authority enacts a law that says, which they
6 have, that we must have equalization of dollars among the
7 school systems of Georgia and they don't fund it, maybe the
8 constitution requires them to fund it.
9
MR. GRAHAM: That's what lawsuits are about, but
10
III Z
11 j:
..o'.."..
~ 12 ~
~r~ 14 ~ t'" :I: 15 .:> III '":;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 ::
let me suggest -MR. VANN: You know, we have a law that says some-
thing, and then I guess we're saying that the law doesn't have any meaning.
MR GRAHAM: It's inoperative is the term. But let me ask -- just look at Paragraph I on Article VIII and let me add four words to that and see if this will do the job, let it read -- first of all, let it
18 read the provision of an adequate education, then add these
19 four words "with equal educational opportunity" for the
20 citizens shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia
21 the expense of which shall be provided for by taxation, so
22 it would be: The provision of an adequate education with an
23 equal educational opportunity for the citizens shall be a
24 primary obligation of the state of Georgia, the expense of
25 which shall be provided for by taxation.
PAGE 91
I think really all we've done there is we've just
2 recognized in as maybe as few words as we possibly can what
3 we all seem to agree on that we do need educational oppor-
4 tunity, but we really don't have to define what that means.
5 That may be the struggle and there is a struggle now. We
6 are --
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Would anybody like to speak to
8 that?
9
MR. VANN: I don't think it's necessary.
10
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. We have --
DR. PRESSLY: I want to ask John one question here.
John, what's worried you is what you see in the
state now as lack of equal educational opportunity; I couldn't
agree with you more.
If the lowest counties or the lowest systems in the
state were made to come up to an adequate education for their
citizens wouldn't it be remedying that situation?
18
MR. GRAHAM: No, sir, I don't believe it
19
DR. PRESSLY: Why not?
20
MR. GRAHAM: I don't think that would eliminate the
21 issue of whether or not we brought them up to adequate, it
22 would still be equal educational opportunity, but I think
23 that --
24
DR. PRESSLY: The thing that you're really say.ing
25 there I don't believe we could ever afford that every student
PAGE 92
in the state has an equal opportunity with every other
2 student in the state in every area of education. I just don't
3 believe the state or the county or the world can afford that.
4 That's saying you've got to
5
The colleges have found they can't afford it, they
6 have had to go together in consortiums and not try to offer
7 everything to everybody.
8
MR. GRAHAM: You're overlooking the fact that we're
9 saying that the only way that they cannot have it is if it's
10
1:1 Z
11 I-
..'o"....
@~:i ! 14 I'<"l :I: 15 .:> CJ '";;) 16 ~... Q Z <l 17 :
educationally based. I'm saying that I don't want the type of education or opportunity that a child has to be based on anything that's not related to education, and that's what these words to me are telling the people in the future because they're saying that constitution recognizes education as fundamental and the only way when anybody raises an issue of whether or not they're being denied an educational opportunity equal in the state, the only way that would ever
18 be justifiable because it is fundamental is if there is some
19 educationally based criteria which justifies it, and by
20 putting these in we're saying we're not going to let you in
21 the future -- we're going to make absolutely clear once and
22 for all that noneducational criteria are going to have nothing
23 to do with equal educational opportunity, like say --
24
MR. VANN: You mean like money?
25
MR. GRAHAM: No, not like money.
PAGE 93
DR. PRESSLY: Like what?
2
MR. GRAHAM: Having education, the type of education
3 a child gets based on things not related to education like
4 sex and religion and race, national origin or the property
5 wealth of where they happen to live, orthe personal wealth
6 of their parents.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could you put those words in
8 there?
9
MR. GRAHAM: No, because I think there's a lot of
10 other things that may come up in the future we just don't
know about.
MR. VANN: Do you think this now provides that the
courts of Georgia would be authorized to say that we could
discriminate against citizens because of sex and race or
religion, this language?
MR. GRAHAM: Well, because it's not clear I don't
know.
18
Just to make this absurd, they could pass legisla-
19 tion in the future that somehow would say the type of
20 education a child's going to get in that school district is
21 going to depend on how many automobiles are in it. Are we
22 going to let schools be chosen by automobile census?
23
MR. VANN: The constitution used to provide that
24 there be separate but equal facilities for black and white
25 in Georgia, we have removed that. Certainly this would
PAGE 94
indicate the United States has said this is illegal, but 2 certainly that would indicate there was an attempt to
3 eliminate any such language having the meaning based on race.
4
MR. GRAHAM: What about the property wealth of where
5 the child happens to live? Should that be related to the type
6 of education that child happens to get?
7
MR. HILL: Not if it deprives him of a minimum
8 educational standard, but that's the problem. I mean if you
9 have a wealthy district should they be prohibited from adding
10 to their program to upgrade their system?
"z
11 j:
@;;."o..."..
DR. PRESSLY: We have covered that when we say that every child in the state shall have an adequate education, in other words up to whatever we want to describe as the
14 ~ minimum situation. It seems to do what you want done.
Ii;
:<z:l
15 ol)
MR. VANN: Theoretically you could carry it to the
""";;)
16 .~.. extreme and say that if it's the obligation of the state to
Q
Z
<l
17 :
see that the citizens have an adequate education that this
18 obligation extends to private schools, families, or to the
19 wealth of a family or
What I'm trying to say is that
20 there is no way we're going to equalize people and people's
21 wealth unless you want to go to another system of government.
22
We may be able to equalize educational opportunity
23 as you say, but I think you speak only from a dollar and
24 cents viewpoint because, you mow, we can provide that
25 everybody has got to have English and everybody has got to
PAGE 95
have a foreign language and everybody has got to have -- we
2 have to offer these particular subject matters, but even then
3 it seems to me like this type of thing would stifle the
4 possibility of improving even upon what you have. That's
5 one of the objects of
6
MR. GRAHAM: Why do we seem to be afraid of stating
7 in here we want equal educational opportunity regardless of
8 what it means? That's what we do want.
9
DR. PRESSLY: I don't think we can provide it if
10 you mean by it exactly the same quality of courses in every
area for every student in the state.
I just think that's idealistic to dream that any
state in the world could provide that. I don't believe it
can ever be done.
I don't object to the phrase except I don't think it
could be brought about.
MS. GREENBERG: Is the fear this is going to create
18 so many lawsuits throughout the state that it's going to
19 overburden the courts?
20
DR. PRESSLY: And financially wreck --
21
MS. GREENBERG: Can't we leave it to the courts to
22 determine that?
23
MR. GRAHAM: If we put i.t in, the courts would say
24 is the inequality a result of criteria related to education or
25 not related to education.
PAGE 96
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What's in there that would make
2 them say that? I mean what's in the language that would make
3 the courts say that?
4
MR. GRAHAM: Equal educational opportunity by statin
5 that makes education fundamental, and therefore there can only
6 be a rational basis for there being inequality, and I think
7 the court would say that only educationally related criteria
8 could be used as a rational basis for justifying inequalities,
9 and all we're saying is that a person coming into court under
10
zCI 11 j:
@;;'o..".... ! 14 :tz;: 15 .:l CI '="' 16 ~... oz 17 :
this is going to have to say "I'm being denied an educational opportunity equal to others in the~ate for some reason that's not rational" like the wealth of where I happen to live, like my sex.
MR. VANN: Why can't the courts say that under the existing language?
MR. GRAHAM: They can . MR. HILL: That may clear the whole question for us.
18
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: If you feel like that, why wait
19 on the courts? If you feel the courts are going to --
20
MR. VANN: It might say no, and it might say yes,
21 I don't know what it might say. but I know one thing --
22 John, what would that language do to the suit?
23
MR. GRAHAM: Nothing.
24
MR. VANN: Nothing. Then what meaning does it have?
25 None?
PAGE 97
MR. GRAHAM: Well, I think it is going to speak our
2 intent, we just don't want people denied opportunity on
3 something that's irrational.
4
MR. VANN: In what way does this constitutional
5 provision deny the opportunity?
6
MR. GRAHAM: I think we can always improve meaning
7 by clarifying language, and I think these four words would
8 clarify once and for all what's not there now. I can't see
9 it though now.
10
~
Czl 11 I-
..o'.."..
12 ~
~r~ 14 ~
1;;
:z:
15 .:l
Cl
'":2 16 .~..
Q
Z 17 :
I know it's somewhere else in the constitution. MR. VANN: Suppose we just added here that no citizen shall be denied equal protection of the law? MR. HILL: That's being added in Article I. MR. VANN: It's not there now? MR. HILL: Not in so many words, but it is being added, will be added in the provision of Article I that will go along with this constitution, so if you wane to restate it
18 here it wouldn,'t hurt.
19
MR. HENRY: Could I ask something. What do you
20 envision a ccurt -- say that this provision was there, would
21 they have to go further than making the General Assembly
22 fund the district power equalization or --?
23
MR. GRAHAM: The court is going to say that if it
24 is unconstitutional, the system that we have, they're going
25 to say to the General Assemb~y as they have done in other
PAGE 98
states, take two or three years or whatever they decide and
2 correct it, make the financial system that meets the
3 constitutional standards, and in every case where that's
4 happened so far fortunately the courts haven't had to
5 exercise they have retained jurisdiction and come back in
6 and the legislature has found or begun to move in that
7 direction.
8
Now, whether district power equalization is what the
9 legislature would end up, or increasing the required local
10 effort or full state financing I don't know, and frankly I'm
relieved that I don't have to do more in the court case than
to suggest to the judge that there are remedies that we
already have one on the books here, and it eases his burden
because he doesn't have to legislate if he agrees that we
have a constitutional problem in the first place.
I would have confidence that the legislature would
find a way to do that and maintain local control of education
18 as the DEP does. The way the DEP is written those funds go
19 to the local systems without strings if it was ever funded.
20
DR, PRESSLY: John, is there a possibility that
21 your statement with equal educational opportunity added here
22 might ultimately lead us to -- I don't know what to call it,
23 a socialist state I guess where the state itself would decide
24 that everybody in the state must have this equal educational
25 opportunity and actually would be moving students from their
PAGE 99
parents to other systems because they couldn't afford to put
2 that opportunity in the local systems" to move the poor
3 child? Is there a possibility of that? That is what is
4 worrying me.
5
If you say adequa't,e you've got a minimum and we can
6 reach that and can afford to reach it and can offer it ,to each
7
I
child, then we can raise what is our concept of adequate.
8
MR. GRAHAM: I want to make sure we offer it to ever 17
9 child.
10
"z
11 Ia-:
.o0..-
~ 12 ~
~r~14 ! !;; :J: 15 .:l "a: ::l 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
MR. HILL: If we were to add Mr. Vann's suggestion, though, and state that in the provision of an adequate education no pupil shall be denied equal protection of law, something that no one is likely to disagree with
MR. VANN: I said no citizen. MR. HILL: No citizen, since we say all citizens shall be provided -MR. GRAHAM: I think citizen is a better word.
18
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Would you buy it, John?
19
MR. GRAHAM: Yeah.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Can we accept that as a
21 compromise?
22
Would you read the language?
23
MR. VANN: I'm not sure -- one of the things that
24 does disturb me is whether if this has the same meaning
25 that's added to the other provision then there's no necessity
for it.
_ _ __ .
...
...._._-_.
PAGE 100
2
MR. HILL: It's not there now, and we don't know
3 what's going to happen to it, so to some extent this would
4 ensure that with respect to education that it's there.
5
MR. VANN: If that's not clearly expressed in the
6 constitution now, it ought to be clearly expressed but not
7 just in connection with education.
8
MR. HILL: I agree with you, but at this point we
9 can't say to you that that's going to be --
10
CzI
... 11 ioo=r: 0..
a::j 14 !... ':-z<":l 15 ~ CorI: ;:) 16 ~... Q Z -<l 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We don't have responsibility for --
MR. HILL: It's in Article I, and it's the recommendation, and there's a lot of debate because as you remember it got hung up in the equal rights provision, you know, ERA, and any time you talk about equal protection of laws it raises the sex issue, so that at least for now for this committee this may be a way out of your dilemma to just
18 state that in the provision an adequate education, no
19 citizen shall be denied equal protection of the law, and that
20 will make it very clear.
21
MR. VANN: I prefer that to what we're discussing,
22 but I'm not really ready to vote to put it in today.
23
MS. GREENBERG: I was reading your proposal, Mr.
24 Graham, from February 22nd where you have proposed language
25 for this, and you have a statement "No child shall be
PAGE 101
discriminated against in the provision of educational
2 resources on account of race, religion, color, national
3 origin, sex, personal or school district wealth or place of
4 residence."
.5
MR. ~RAHAM: That language was 'taken from Texas'
6 constitution I believe.
7
~ffi. GREENBERG: Would that more clearly describe
8 what the committee would like to see in this section?
9
DR. PRESSLY: I have no objection to that at all
10
11 ".z..
'0.0"....
~@r12 .!':".:.! j: .z.. U '" 14 .>.-. '<"l: :J: 15 .:> ":'"> 16 '.z".. c Z <l: 17 ''""
because I don't think that bumps into the problem that to me the equal educational opportunity bumps into . I'll buy that.
MR. GRAHAM: Why don't we say that no citizen will be discriminated against in the provision of educational resources on account of race, religion, color, national origin, sex, personal or school district wealth ~- I'm not sure I would leave in place of residence because if you're talking about personal or district wealth you may hit that
18 issue.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's a real hard one here.
20
DR. PRESSLY: It's a hard one.
21
MR. HILL: The problem then when you start listing
22 the bases on which you're not going to discriminate against
23 someone you may leave one out. that you may think of later, 24 and equal protection of law covers all that.
25
CHAIRMAN ME~DITH: Why don't we use the word --
- - - --~------"----" ---
PAGE 102
it seems to me the tradeoff here was the educational resources
2 as opposed to educational opportunity, that seems -- wasn't
3 that the difference in that?
4
MS. GREENBERG: Resources, does that --
5
MR, HILL: That sounds like a dollar, you have to
6 have a dollar for dollar in each district and that may not
7 be -- you don't want to mandate that in the constitution
8 certainly.
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We did have one statement that
10 seemed to satisfy everybody except the person who put it
forward, no --
MR. VANN: No citizen shall be denied equal protec-
tion of the law. I would prefer that to the other language,
and all I'm saying, I don't think it's necessary. I guess I
just threw it out as seeing that's what you're trying to say.
If you wanted tO$y that, if somebody wanted to
propose it --
18
t,;HAIRMAN M.t:REDITH: Would somebody read that
19 statement someplace in here?
20
MR. VANN: It would just be at the end of it, it
21 would say that the provision of an adequate education for
22 the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the state of
2J Georgia, the expense of which shallbe provided for by
24 taxation. No citizen shall be denied equal protection of
25 the law, period.
PAGE 103
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: John?
2
MR. GRAHAM: Well, the question is does the
3 constitution provide equal educational opportunity for all
4 citizens. I think that language would come close to doing
5 that, and certainly being in the education section of the
6 constitution would reflect the importance that I'm really
7 trying to make this place on education.
8
You know, there are three questions that I think we
9 need to make sure that this section meets:
10
"z
11 l-
."lol.<".
12 ~
@ ~sv
~
~F~
! 14
I-
':z":
15 .l)
"ll<
;:)
16 .~..
Q
Z
17 :::
One. does the constitution ensure equal educational opportunity for all citizensj
Two, does it prohibit factors which bear no substantial relation to the state's obligation to provide public schoolsj and
Three. does it ensure that the state has sufficient revenues to fulfill the criteria. and it does when it says provide for taxation.
18
I just wanted to make sure that whatever we draft
19 says it's a primary duty which we have. I like the word
20 adequate because we can't seem to find a better one, and I
21 like the word equal because we're stating there that every
22 citizen in our state is going to have equal opportunity, and
23 by stating equal protection of the laws I think you have said
24 the same thing maybe in more palatable language.
25
I want a citizen of this state to always have the
I
PAGE 104
rr-------------------------- ----------,
right to go to court and say "I am being denied equal
2 opportunity for education in this state."
3
MR. VANN: Every citizen I know of has got it.
4
MR. GRAHAM: And here is why --
5
MR. VANN: I mean he's got the right to go to court.
6 You didn~ exactly mean it that way.
7
MR. GRAHAM: And raise the issue that "I'm being
8 denied equal opportunity for education in this state," and
9 then be able to give his or her reasons why they think they
10
.."z
11 i=
..o.....
~;j ! 14 ~ 'x<"Cl ..15 .:I "::> 16 .~.. Q Z <Cl 17 I:
are being denied equal educational opportunity, MK. VANN: You don't think they have that right now
to go to court and raise this issue? MR. GRAHAM: They're doing it now, but I don't know
whether the court is going to state that -MR. VANN: That's different from saying the court
will say you have -MR. GRAHAM: If we say it in the constitution, then
18 it becomes not a matter of whether the constitution gives it
19 to them but a matter of whether or not they in fact have it.
20
MR. VANN: What I'm saying is you cast it in the
21 context of access to the courts, and I don't think there's
22 any question that there's access to the courts on the issue.
23
MR. GRAHAM: The issue before the courts now is
24 does the constitution provide equal educational opportunity
25 for citizens of this state.
PAGE 105
If the constitution said that, then the question
2 would be does the citizen have equal educational opportunity
3 in the state.
4
We have got a threshold question in the courts now,
5 does the constitution of the state of Georgia provide equal
6 educational opportunity for the citizens of the state. That
7 is a question that's never been decided in the state of
8 Georgia..
9
MR. VANN: Yet the major issue addressed in the case
10
"z
11 Ie..oo..-..:
~ 12 ~
~F~ ! 14 I'z" 15 .:I "eo: :) 16 ~ Qz 17 :
is really the financing of education, isn't it? DR. PRESSLY: Yes, sir. MR. GRAHAM: The question we are stating -- the
system of financing we're saying is unconstitutional because it doesn't provide equal educational opportunity, but to go back to the threshold question, does the constitution mandate equal educational opportunity for its citizens? Where does it say that in the constitution?
18
I think the court is going to say yes, the -- I
19 think they're going to get over that threshold, I think they'rE
20 going to rule that it does provide equal educational
21 opportunity.
22
DR. PRESSLY: I can't bring myself to believe that
23 beyond a certain point the state can possibly give equal
24 educational opportunity to all of its citizens in the terms
25 you're now talking about. I don't think the state can possibl
do it beyond a point.
PAGE 106
------'--------------.,
2
I think it can meet a minimum, but beyond that
3 they can't do it, and I don't think we ought to put in here
4 something that says you must. We'll be in law courts for
5 ever, we would just be
6
MR. GRAHAM: There's nothing wrong with that.
7
DR. PRESSLY: Being in law courts 1br ever? Not as
8 far as you lawyers are concerned I'm sure, but I object
9 strenuously--
10
I!I Z
11 ~
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
@)_.~
! 14 ... ':"r
15 q
I!I
'";;) 16 ~...
Q
Z
17 :
MR. GRAHAM: Not as far as a child that lives in Whitfield County is concerned either.
DR. PRESSLY: This covers it, no citizen shall be prohibited equal protection of the law covers it.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think we can move on, then . MR. VANN: What's this now? CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We can move on, then . MR. OWENS: We voted a few minutes ago, but some-
18 body rejected that.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Adding your statement at the end
20 of it, let's vote on it and record the vote.
21
Okay. All in favor of the motion that the statement
22 be that no citizenshall be denied equal protection of the law
23 be added to Section I of Article VIII.
24
(Ayes.)
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Oppos ed.
PAGE 107
MR. VANN: I'm opposed, but only because I think
2 it's unnecessary,
3
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. It's been properly moved
4 -- I mean it's been --
5
MR. OWENS: That's VIII one isn't it?
6
CHAIRMAN MERl<.:DtTH: Article VIII, Section I.
7
MR. OWENS: I mean that's the first question?
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Oh, yes. That is --
9
MR. OWENS: That is the second part of Question l?
10
."z
11 j:
..o....
@;j ! 14 I':<"rl ..15 o!) "::> Ih .~.. Q Z <l 17 ::i
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Actually what we have said then
is the constitution -- actually we made this an (a) and a 0-
MR. OWENS: That's right. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The adequate education statement is acceptable as correct, and we're agreed to add tpe equal protection clause. Ukay. Let's go to the second one. "Shouid the provision stating that an adequate education for the citizens of Georgia
18 shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia be
19 changed?"
20
MR. GRAHAM: We just answered that one.
21
MS. GREENBERG: The state school superintendent
22 was suggesting we should add it should also be an obligation
23 of the local sytems.
24
MR. GRAHAM: I think the other witnesses stated
25 Georgia was a broad enough statement to encompass all areas
PAGE 108
n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_ _----,
and branches of,government at all levels.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Each one has an obligation to do
3 whatever.
4
MR. HILL: In the 1970 proposal it was stated it
5 shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia and its
6 political subdivisions.
7
MR. GRAHAM: Isn't that kind of --
8
MR. HILL: The original question, though, that Eldon
9 had raised long ago, and I think the school superintendent
10
13 Z
11 j:
oe.".x".:
@)~~~ ! 14 l:Vr> 15 .:> 1ex3: :> 16 ~... az 17 :
was raising again was it may imply the General Assembly as opposed to the political subdivisions, and he thoUght -- at least the superintendent today again stated he felt it would be better to clarify that it was an obligation not only of the state at this level but at the local level as well.
MR. GRAHAM: I think the problem there is when you put that in who's going to decide what is supposed to be done at what level. When you leave it the state of Georgia you
18 don't have that problem of somebody backing out and saying
19 "Well, that's their responsibility."
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Ultimately somebody in the state
21 would have to do it.
22
MR. GRAHAM: That's what maybe the constitution ough~
23 to have. I don't really think we ought to change the state of
24 Georgia; if it means the three branches of government, the
25 political subdivisions --
PAGE 109
MR. VANN: I don't think so either, but I --
2
The subcommittee dealing with the sections on the
3 local educational constitutional provision which deals with
4 county school systems and local boards of education -- you
5 know, if they were to recommend removing that or changing
6 that in someway then I might have some question about it,
7 although I would say that the term state of Georgia encompasse
8 the whole power of the state of Georgia and any subdivision
9 that it might create without any question.
9~
10
"z
11 ~
o
. _-12 ~""
i
~ 14 I-
CIt
<t J:
15 ~
"'";)
16 ~ Q z <t
17 :
I don't have any doubt about that, and if the court
said otherwise I'd be surprised.
,MR. OWENS: An. you ,saying now that i t might be
no~ interpreted that this does
include the subdivisions?
MR. VANN: I , m saying that it does. I ' m sh aying t e
state of Georgia is an all-encompassing term.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: So we have consensus on this one
right? Am I correct?
18
MR. OWENS: You might make a note there in the
19 writing and everything that this is accepted on the basis of
20 the fact we said the state of Georgia is all-encompassing,
21 it's including all these divisions, the subdivisions and
22 everything, that's the way we're looking at it.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We can't put that
24
MR. OWENS: I just thought I would bring that out,
25 that might be a note somewhere.
PAGE 110
We can't put it in the constitution, but in writing
2 it we have a feeling
3
MR. VANN: I'm not sure that Dr. McDaniel, I think
4 he -- I'm not sure whether he was indicating that there ought
5 not to be local participation in financing.
6
MR. OWENS: No, I hope he didn't mean that.
7
MR. VANN: We now provide for it in other sections
8 of the constitution. That's why I say if there was any
9 changes made in that I think it might relate to this also.
10
I!l Z
11 l-
@ ~..lol..<..
6rlr12~ ! 14
I-
'0"(
:r
15 .:>
I!l ll<
;;;)
16 .~..
oz
0(
17 :
Presently I think it ought to stay like it is unless there are some changes made in the local educational provisions.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Can we pass this one by consensus?
Is that agreeable? MR. GRAHAM: Yes. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Three, "Should the state be required to assume a greater responsibility for the financing
18 of public education?"
19
MR. GRAHAM: I don't think that's a constitutional
20 question, I think that would be encompassed as now we have it
21 in Paragraph I when we state provided for by taxation. The
22 General Assembly must provide the answer to that question.
23
I hope we wouldn't have to provide in our
24 constitution percentages of financing.
25
MR. VANN: I think it now has the power to.
rr-----------------.----------
PAGE 111
MS. GREENBERG: You don't want a statement in the
2 constitution to that effect.
3
MR. VANN: What greater responsibility could they
4 assume than is assumed in Paragraph 11
S
MR. GRAHAM: I don't have any objection to the
6 second sentence of Section VIII on freedom of association
7 where it says the General Assembly shall by taxation provide
8 funds for an adequate education for the citizens of Georgia.
9 I don't have any problem with that portion of that. although
10 I know the reason for which that was tacked onto the
provision, but I don't think that the constitution ought to
relate itself to anything more than we have already recognized
that it's the primary obligation of the state.
MR. VANN: What I'm saying is this question really
is saying should assume a greater responsibility for the
financing of public education.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think we all agree on that
18 one. I don't think we've got a problem.
19
"Should the state be given more authority to set
20 minimum educational standards for private schools?"
21
MR. OWENS: I think they should, but I don't know
22 how.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Where would it go? Do we have
24 any suggestions?
2S
First of all, we do agree as a committee that some
PAGE 112
----- -----------,
statement to this effect should be included in the
2 constitution?
3
MR. OWENS: I agree.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let's see. Do we have agreement
5 on that? If not, then we'll need to proceed.
6
MR. GRAHAM: I don't agree.
7
MR. VANN: I don't agree.
8
MR. GRAHAM: As much as I think the state ought to
9 set minimum educational standards for private schools, I
10
CzI 11 j:
o.'G".o. ~ 12 ~
~-_.~
! 14 Iut <:r
15 .:J
CI
~ '" 16 ~...
Q
Z
< 17 :
think in Article VIII, Section I, when we say adequate education for the citizens has done it.
MS. GHEENBERG: That section is titled Public Education,' and I would assume that that would negate any control over private education. Why don't we entitle it Education?
MR. VANN: Because it would cover the gamut of higher education too.
18
Maybe it ought to be at the top of both of the
19 sections for common schools and higher education, but you:'re
20 saying that the words system of common schools, free tuition--
21
Am I reading from the current constitution?
22
MR. HILL: Yes, that's right.
23
MR. VANN: I thought I was.
24
gives a meaning to the constitutional paragraph
25 as referring only to common schools.
PAGE 113
rr---------------------.------ ---------..,
MR. GRAHAM: I guess it does.
2
Do we have any provision in any other constitutions
3 in the country relating themselves to private education? I
4 have never seen one.
5
MR. HENRY: I would think that to the extent that
6 the state didn't impinge on any First Amendment rights they
7 could come in and regulate under their inherent police
8 powers. Whether they would do that or not is a separate
9 question.
10
MR. GRAHAM: It wouldn't be in the constitution, it
"z
@~ r14!i ~
11 ...
.'o."....
would be under a legislative license.
12 ~
MR. VANN: If it's in the constitution, you know,
it st~ll might be subject only to legislative enactment
... unless it was self-executing, and I don't think something like
lI>
:r
15 ,) that could be self-executing.
":'>"
16 ~...
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could we put it under the
Q
Z
17 : Section II, under the powers of the state board of education?
18
MR. HILL: I think that's where it would belong,
19 under the state board shall --
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Some statement to ensure
21 Paragraph I or what's stated in Paragraph I, that the state
22 board of education be empow~red to establish minimum
23 educational standards for private schools.
24
MR. HILL: For all students. Just encompass it
25 that way. You don't even have to pinpoint the fact that you'r~
rr--------------------------
going after private schools.
PAGE 114
2
MR. VANN: We're noW regulating private schools
3 in the state board of education or through legislative
4 enactment. There must be some theory that there's
5 constitutional authorization for it now.
6
It hasn't been attacked I guess from a constitution 1
7 viewpoint, but we ought to regulate private higher education
8 schools.
9
MR. OWENS: We're concerned about the standards of
10
"z
11 j:
@ i.'o.."....
~r~12
! 14 IUI :r
15 ~
":'"l
16 .~..
cz
17 ~
the private schools, but I feel that if we do in the consti~ution or any other document or through policy of the state board make some kind of mandate in this respect wouldn't we also be then tied to a financial obligation to the schools?
MR. VANN: That's a possibility. MR. OWENS: I'm sure that something needs to be done. I know what needs to be done, I just don't know how.
18
Is it the law the way it's structured? We're dealin
19 here mostly with public schools.
20
MR. VANN: I'm a strong supporter of public
2l education, but I can see nothing wrong with private schools
22 functioning in their domain also. The only thing I want them
23 to do is function with their own money and not with tax
24 money.
25
MR. HI1JL: And provide an adequate education.
PAGE 115
MR. VANN: You knpw, that's just like -- well, if
2 that's an obligation of the state --
I guess what I'm
3 saying is that in the nation in which we live this is a
4 decision I guess that the parents make about where they send
5 their children to school, that if citizens come together and
6 form private institutions that we should see that they are
7 not criminally -- you know, that there is no fraud or crime
8 committed in connection with it, but as to whether we ought
9 to regulate what they teach or whether they have air
10
"z
11 i=
'o.0"....
~ 12 ~
~J~ ! 14 ... ':<"r 15 .:. '"" ::J }() .~.. Q Z < 17 :
conditioning or -CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But it could be a crime if the
school did not provide an adequate education. MR. VANN: It might be a crime for them to -- it
might be some type of criminal thing that could be done for them to have such conduct that it would be a fraud, that they were providing --
DR. PRESSLY: Let me make a suggestion here and see
18 if it won't cover all th is .
19
It seems to me that this section, Section I,
20 instead of being called public education ought to be called
21 elementary and secondary education, and then in Paragraph I
22 you could say very well the provision of an adequate education
23 for the citizens shall be a primary obligadon of the state of
24 Georgia, the expense of public education shall be provided for
25 by taxation, and that way they can't ever say the private
PAGE 116
schools have to be supported by public funds, which I would
2 be much opposed to, and at the same time they come under
3 rule they have to have an adequate education, and then the 4 state board can decide to see that they have an adequate 5 education.
6
MR. GRAHAM: In Section I you call it Elementary
7 and Secondary Education
8
DR. PRESSLY: That's right, instead of public
9 education.
10
MR. GRAHAM: Then Paragraph I, you entitle that
" 11 z~ Where are you reading?
o......
@2IF~12 ~
DR. PRESSLY: Right here. Just wAke this elementary
~
~ and secondary education, and right here the provision of an
14 ~ adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary
':<"rl;
15.:> obligation
"~
:t
16 .~..
MR. VANN: That's the whole article on Section I is
Q
Z
<l;
17:
with public education, that deals with higher and lower --
18
DR. PRE~SLY: Oh, does it have higher later on in
19 there?
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We have board of regents under
21 Section IV.
22
DR. PRESSLY: Oh, me.
23
MR. HENRY: That paragraph could be called --
24
MR. VANN: I think the whole paragraph deals with
25 public education.
PAGE 117
MR. GRAHAM: I don't think so, because we don~t
2 provide free tuition for higher education.
3
DR. PRESSLY: That's where the difference comes.
4
MS. GREENBERG: An adequate education does not
5 encompass post-secondary education.
6
MR. OWENS: It does what?'
7
MS. GREENBERG: Does not include post-secondary
8 education.
9
DR. PRESSLY: We have post-secondary in this section
10
"z
11 t-
o.ao.<..
9;1 ! 14 t':z": 15 .:> "0< :> 16 ~... az
17 :
MS. GREENBERG: But we don't in ~ection I. Section II is state board, Section III is --
MR. VANN: Article VIII, yes. DR. PRESSLY: Then I think go back under Section I, simply call it elementary and secondary education, and then MR. VANN: I guess what we're saying under the connotation of it, Article VIII is education, then Section I is public education and that's Paragraph I
18
DR. PRESSLY: What I'm saying is instead of making
19 it public let's make it elementary and secondary education,
20 leave the sentence the provision of an adequate education
21 for the citizens, which means that applies to public and
22 private, shall be a primary obligation of the state, the
23 expense of public education shall be provided for by taxa-
24 tion, and it clarifies the whole thing without any problem
25 there.
PAGE 118
MR. GRAHAM: You have to change the title of
2 Paragraph I to be a system of --
3
MR, HILL: That would have to be changed.
4
DR. PRESSLY: That would have to be changed, yes.
-'
5
MR.. GRAHAM: Then the provision of the second
6 sentence which we have added to that article would make no
7 difference.
8
MR.. VANN: You know, in the gamut of an education
9 that's provided is also adult education, we provide --
10
"z
11 j:
".o.....
~ 12 ~
B-~
! 14 t; :r 15 ~
""::t
16 ~... Q Z
17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's covered under -DR. P~SSLY: In another section. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: -- Paragraph II as to elderly citizens, it doesn't say anything about -MR.. VANN: That's under the board of regents. MR. HILL: I think there's an implication in Paragraph I that we're speaking to primary and secondary education because of its obligation of the state to fund it,
18 you know, free tuition. We certainly don't have free tuition
19 in our postsecondary or adult or vocational ed programs.
20
MR. WATTS: Yeah, there's free tuition in
21 vocational programs.
22
MR. VANN: In adult education?
23
MR. HILL: Is there with the board of regents?
24
MR. VANN: I'm not talking about colleges, I mean
25 there's adult education provided for high school level,
PAGE 119
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That would be secondary and
2 still fall under secondary and elementary.
3.
MR. HENRY: There is a separate paragraph on adult
4 education, it would be Sect~on IX on special schools.
5
MR. GRAHAM: What page is that?
6
MR. HENRY: It would be page 69.
7
MS. GREENBERG: That's a special section, that's not
8 the entirety of the adult vocational ed special school program.
9
DR. PRESSLY: The section we're talking about,
10
"z
11 l-
...oI:<
l:I.
~ 12 ~
(@)F~
! 14 I':~z":
15 ~
"I:<
;;)
16 .~.. oz ~ 17 :
Section I, is dealing only with secondary and elementary education.
MR. VANN: If thishas some meaning in the constitution, I wasn't paying any attention to titles, but it would seem to me like it would be better to leave public education and change systems of common schools to
,
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Systems of public education and primary -- change it right there.
18
MR. HILL: The point of changing it is so that this
19 provision will cover the private school situation-as well.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. If you change where it
21 says system, leave it as public education --
22
MR. HILL: We don't want to because we're going to
23 cover both public and private, so that is why Dr. Pressly
24 wants to remove it.
25
DR. PRESSLY: You could do this, you could put
PAGE 120
public and private education at the top.
2
MR. HILL: Then it highlights it.
3
DR. PRESSLY: You're really bringing it out then.
4
MF.. GRAHAM: You may as well be up front with this.
5
MS. GREENBERG: I think Dr. Pressly's idea was good.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I support that too.
7
MS. GREENBERG: To change the title to of Section
8 I to --
9
DR. PRESSLY: Elementary and secondary education.
10
"z
11 j:
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 !;; :z: 15 ~ '"";;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What would you do with the systems of common schools?
MS. GREENBERG: Just take it out and leave it secondary and elementary education as the title of the paragraph.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Can we pass that by consensus? MR. OWENS: We're saying the title should be elementary and secondary education1
18
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Right, then we insert the
19 expense of publiC education shall be provided for by taxation.
20
MR. OWENS: That's highlighting public, still giving
21 some -- The only part that's changed in the constitution,
22 and I was trying to think -- do you have anything in the 23 constitution that makes saying elementary and higher 24 education should, et cetera, and then public education which
25 represents the private schools1 Is there anything in the
PAGE 121
constitution that makes that illegal?
2
MR. GRAHAM: You have to remember we're just
3 coming up with a draft for study the next time. Let's get a
4 concensus on that.
S
MR. VANN: If it's not entitled Public Education,
6 what are we adding about --
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We're giving ourselves an
8 opportunity to give the state board or somebody an opportunity
9 to provide an adequate education for all the citizens of
10 Georgia whether it's public or private. We're also protecting
"z
11 j:
."o...
@}~i
ourselves by adding in that the expense of public education shall be borne by taxation.
MR. VANN: Then all I'm saying is Section I is
! 14 !:z;;: 15 .:>
.."":>
16 ~
Q
Z 17 :
Public Education, and the heading System of Common Schools and Free Tuition --
MR. OWENS: We are changing that . MK. VANN: But it says the expense of which. Now
18 what is that referring to?
19
DR. PRESSLY: That's what we were changing.
20
What we would do, we would say the provision of an
21 adequate education for the citizens shall be the primary
22 obligation of the State of Georgia, period. The expense of
23 public education shall be provided for by taxation, and then
24 your sentence -- another period -- no citizen shall be
2S denied equal protection of the law.
PAGE 122
MR. WATTS: Does that wording still allow the state
2 the option of providing free post-secondary vocational
3 education?
4
DR. PRESSLY: I don't see why not.
5
MR. WATTS: I was just checking to make sure.
6
MR. VANN: One of the problems I guess about any
7 subcommittee, we shouldn't do anything that relates to
8 something else, but what is the vocational education section?
9
MR. HILL: It's Section IX.
10
MR. VANN: Is that the only vocational education
@);;11
"z
j:
'o.."....
section?
MR. HILL:
That's the only place in the constitution
where vocational education is mentioned, and it only relates
! 14 ... to the authorization of local school systems to get together '" :I:
15 ol) and set up, establish a board to create a vo-tech or a special'
"'";)
16 .~.. ed school in its area and provide bonds and taxation in that Czl
17 ~ area for it, but that's the only place where it's really
18 mentioned.
19
MS. GREENBERG: That's never been utilized to create
20 a vocational education or a vocational tech school. They
21 have been implemented under Section II, State Board of
22 Education. That's where all the vocational tech schools
23 have been created.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We have a draft of Dr. PresslY's
25 language. Does anybody second that motion?
PAGE 123
MR, OWENS: Seconded.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Does anybody want to spe
3 on the motion?
4
If not, all in favor of the motion.
5
(Ayes.)
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Opposed.
7
The motion is carried.
8
5, "Should Section VIII of Article VIII on freedom
9 of Association be retained in the constitution?"
10
"z
11 ...
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
l (@)r ' g ~ 14 ... ':"r 15 00 "'"::> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :;
I'm open for a motion on that. I think we have had adequate discussion on that particular one.
MR. OWENS: I make the motion that it be not retained.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Be deleted? MR. OWENS: Deleted. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Second to that motion? Second to that motion?
18
Can I second?
19
MR. HILL: I don't know.
20
MR. GRAHAM: We'll let you second.
21
MR. VANN: I'll second it. Let's have a little
22 discussion.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: All right. It's been properly
24 moved and seconded that Section VIII of Article VIII be
25 deleted, and you can speak to the motion.
MR. VANN:
PAGE 124
~--------------------,
In our discussion before there were two
2 things really, one of them was the first sentence, and the
3 other one was the second sentence, and I gather that none of
4 us really understood the whole impact of this particular
5 section except that it probably originated out of the 1954
6 Supreme Court decision.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Not probably. She brought in
8 explicit statements last time.
9
MS. GREENBERG: I sent a memo which you should have
10 received which talks about the origin of this provision.
"z
11 ~
Io..l..l..:.
@;I
meeting,
MR. VANN: I did. Did you have more than one memo? MS. GREENBERG: No. It was handed out at the last I sent that to members who were absent, but it
14 !.. ':"z: 15 ~
"Ill:
~
16 .~.. Q Z
17 :
originated with the commission on education after the Supreme Court decided the Brown v. Board of Education, and it was to circumvent that decision and allow for freedom of association, and also tuition grants to private schools.
18
MR. VANN: That's fine. I'm ready to vote on it.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Any further discussion on
20 the motion?
21
DR. PRESSLY: This is deleting it?
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Deleting it. All in favor of
23 the motion --
24
MR. GRAHAM: One more thing.
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: All right.
PAGE 125
MR. GRAHAM: I don't have any objection to the
2 second sentence.
3
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: But the second sentence seems to
4 be redundant in that Paragraph I of Section I has already
5 taken care of that.
6
MR. GRAHAM: All right.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Unless you would like that
8 language used instead of the language that is already there
9 which--
10
MR. GRAHAM: You may read into the second sentence
CzI
11
i=
o..C..l..:
of that total state funding of education.
@ ; j whether I'm ready to do that yet. I'm ready to vote,
I don't know
! 14 lo-n % 15 .:l
CI Cl:
:;)
16 ~... Q Z
17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Any further unreadiness? All in favor of the motion. (Ayes.) CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Opposed. The motion is carried.
18
6, "Should t e method of selection of the state boar
19 of education be changed?" Do we have enough time to deal
20 with this?
21
Let me think for a minute, maybe we can handle this
22 a different way. Let me just think for a minute and see if
23 the way it's written here is the way to approach this.
24
MR. VANN: This new draft clarifies it some. The
25 other one said the method of selection of the state board
..----------------.------
PAGE 126
of education or school superintendent be changed.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: This one separates it out.
3 All right. "Should the method of selection of the state board
4 of education be changed?"
5
DR. PRESSLY~ I move it not be changed.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Second to Dr. Pressly's motion?
7
MR. VANN: I second it.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's been properly moved and
9 seconded that the selection of the state board of education
10 not be changed.
"z
11 j:
.lo.I..l..:
@;i motion?
You have heard the motion. Any unreadiness on the MR. OWENS: I'm going to have to say that -- I'll
! 14 ... just vote that way. Go ahead .
':"r
15 .:l
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Does anyone want the process be
"lIl:
;;)
16 .~.. reviewed? Does everyone understand the method in which it
17 g"z is presently being done?
18
Would somebody do it for me? I'm not quite sure.
19 It's called for in the constitution, right?
20
DR. PRESSLY: What section is that?
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Section II. There shall be one
22 member from each congressional district who shall be appointed
23 by the Governor by and with the advice and consent of the
24 Senate.
25
Okay. Are you ready for a vote? All in favor of
PAGE 127
the motion signify by aye.
2
(Ayes. )
3
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Opposed.
4
MR.. OWENS: No .
5
MR. GRAHAM: No.
6
MR.. VANN: Mr. Chairman?
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH : What do we have? Two and two.
8
My unreadiness is if this passes then we'll combine
9 them when we get to the other one, and I have some questions
10 about the other one.
MR. OWENS: Mr. Chairman, may I make a statement?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Let '8 see if we can't -- We've
got a tie.
MR. OWENS: I'll wait until you decide how you're
going to vote, then I'll make my statement.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I 1m going to vote that it should
be changed, and then I would like to have another motion from
18 the group that will give us the authority to-come back and
19 reconsider this after we have dealt with
20
MR.. GRAHAM: I 80 move.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Does anybody want to second?
22
MR.. VANN: Second.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You see what I'm trying to do?
24
MR.. GRAHAM: Why don't I suggest that the five of us
25 -- maybe we could get a better feeling where we Ire going to
r r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - -..
PAGE 128
go if we just each took less than two minutes to state that
2 everything else being j uClt right what WP. would have. Maybe
3 that would be a better way for us to come at the question.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. We do have a motion on
go 5 the floor, we need to ahead and get that one off, and that
6 is that we
7
MR. VANN: It's off. I mean you voted it --
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There was another motion that
9 gave us the opportunity to come back and look at it after we
10 looked at
"z
11 oi.r"=.r-.:
~ 12 ~
~--~
you.
! 14 ~ OIl ":zl:
15 .:I
"rr:
;)
16 ~... Q Z
17 a
DR. PRESSLY: I'll withdraw my second if that helps
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. That motion dies. MR. GRAHAM: I withdraw the motion. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The motion has been withdrawn. Okay. Would you like to start? MR. OWENS: Yes, I'll start. Who's going to time us
18 now for the two minutes?
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I have an alarm 1'11 fix to go
20 off. You have two minutes.
21
MR. OWENS: Okay. I'll make it to the point, short.
22 I have lost already thirty seconds.
23
I feel that the state superintendent should be
24 appointed strongly, and I also feel that the board should be
25 elected. If there is difficulty and problems of electing the
PAGE 129
school board then I feel that the state superintendent should
2 remain being elected and the board remaining as it is.
3
In other words, if there is going to be a change
4 it needs to be a change in both situations, the superintendent
5 as well as the board.
6
If it's going to be changed just with the state
7 superintendent being appointed and the board being appointed,
8 then I would rather it stay as it is because the accountabilit~
9 is there even though we're saying we have problems with it.
10
.."z
11 I-
o......
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 I':~"r .. 15 ~ ":> 16 .~.. Q Z ~ 17 ::
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: John? MR. GRAHAM: First let me say my second choice is the same as Odell's second choice, leave things like they are. I prefer that the state school superintendent be appointed, I prefer that a different method for the selection of the state board of education be made, and I'm not in favor of the election on a district wide basis of the state school
18 board.
19
I would prefer a method of selection which makes the
20 state school board member more attentive and directly in line
21 with the area that he represents other than simply appointing
22 him by the Governor, and I would favor something along the 23 lines Dr. Mullins has recommended,
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. You both took less than
25 two minutes combined.
PAGE 130
1
Dr. Pressly, follow that precedent.
2
DR. PRESSLY: I'm wholeheartedly in favor of the
3 superintendent being appointed. I would be perfectly willing
4 to settle for the state board being selected just as it is
5 today.
6
On the other hand, if this is going to worry people
7 then I would like to go to Mr. Mullins' suggestion.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. Mr. Vann?
9
MR. VANN: My view is very much like Mr. Owens'.
10 I prefer to elect the state board and appoint the superin-
tendent. however, as a practical matter in my jud.gment we
should leave it as it is, let the state board be appointed by
the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and
the state superintendent be elected by the people.
I think the present method of appointment of the
state board provides for input by both the executive depart-
ment and the legislative.
18
DR. PRESSLY: Didn't you say you preferred the
19 election of the state board?
20
MR. VANN: Did I say
I said as a practical
21 matter I think that's not a feasible solution.
22
DR. PRESSLY: I'm with you.
23
MR. VANN: As a consequence I wouldn't want the
24 state board to be elected, but I just think it would -- and
25 I don't want the state board to be a body where the member
PAGE 131
is a full time paid servant of the state of Georgia, and
2 therefore I guess my first preference is to leave it like it
3 is because I think the other methods are unachievable.
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay.
5
I guess my position is that the primary concern from
6 my .point of view is the relationship between the superin-
7 tendent and the board, and so therefore I favor the
8 superintendent being appointed by the board, and I have no
9 real concern as to how -- any way the board could be constitutEd
10 would be okay with me provided the superintendent is appointed
11
"z
j:
..Do....:
by
the board.
~ 12 ~
DR. PRESSLY: How many of us said we would prefer
~F~ the superintendent be appointed? Didn't we everyone say that?
! 14 1;;
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Everybody, yes.
:z:
15 ~
DR. PRESSLY: I thought so.
"D:
:>
16 .~..
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: So then where we are then --
Q
Z
17 :
MR. VANN: It's tied together.
18
DR. PRESSLY: I realize that,
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Where we are then is what way
20 can we come up with that would provide a satisfactory way of
21 constituting the board.
22
DR. PRESSLY: 11ay I ask this, What is the great
23 harm of our suggesting that we appoint the superintendent and 24 leave the state board as it is? What danger do we run?
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The danger is we have been
PAGE 132
warned by at least Mrs. Graham who said that she would not
2 participate in this process at all if both of them are
3 appointed. I think that that view is probably shared by a
4 large segment of our citizens of this state.
5
MR. HILL: Not to mention the Select Committee.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Also we had some comments
7 from the Speaker of the House and others who indicated that
8 they would not support anything that had both the superin-
9 tendent andthe board appointed.
10
DR. PRESSLY: It seems to me there's nothing wrong
\!l Z
@;;11 ..joc..r:..:
with our making this suggestion knowing darn well we'll probably get shot down, but go ahead and make it because that's the way we all feel.
! 14 t; ~:z:
15 0)
\!l
~
16 ~... Q Z ~
17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: If we don't try to compromise on the school board, then we're going to lose the appointment of the superintendent by the board .
MR. OWENS: Yes, because I feel very strongly that
18 one or the other should be accountable to the people.
19
DR. PRESSLY: Do you think Mr. Mullins' statement
20 makes the board accountable to the people?
21
MR. OWENS: The quasi kind of election process?
22
DR. PRESSLY: Yes,
23
MR. OWENS: He brought up the county board.s of
24 education, the local boards of education. You see, all of
25 them are not elected, some of them are appointed, so you
PAGE 133
still don't have that as full as it should be.
2
If that were the case that all of them were
3
DR. PRESSLY: Aren't the majority elected? We've
4 got it right here.
5
MR. uWENS: I don't have access to that point.
6 And that I've tried to look into, I've studied it, and it just
7 doesn't meet approval with some of the school boards being
8 appointed.
9
DR. PRE~SLY: Maybe this would encourage the rest of
10
"z
11 i=
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
~Fi ! 14 ... '" :I: 15 ,) ":'>" 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :;
them to go on and be elected, the school boards. MR. GRAHAM: I think the other portion is, the
other committee, are they going to come up with a recommendation that local school boards be elected?
MR. HILL: No, no. They're going to recommend that they be exactly as is on the effective date of the constitution and that they be changed locally subject to referendum They're not going to try to change the method of selection
18 of every local board in the state.
19
DR. PRESSLY: Vickie, how many of them are now
20 elected? Do you recall?
21
MS. GREENBERG: Well, I handed out, I mailed out a
22 memo dealing with the boards of education. Okay.
23
There are 187 boards of education; 120 boards are
24 elected by voters, 51 boards are appointed by grand juries,
25 11 boards are appointed by city council -- those are the
PAGE 134
independent school systems -- three boards are appointed by
2 a combination method, one county board is selected by a
3 combination of methods, and one independent board is se1f-
4 perpetuating.
5
DR. PRESSLY: Aren't most of the groups that are
6 appointing them, aren't they elected officials like the
7 cODDllission?
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Except the grand jury.
9
DR. PRESSLY: The grand jury is the only one.
10
MR. HILL: 51 are appointed by the grand jury.
"z
11 t:
@;;.'o.". 1M
MS, GREENBERG: And 120 are elected. DR. PRESSLY: So the vast majority are elected or at least appointed by elective officials,
! 14 1;; :<z:l
15 olI not.
"co:
;:)
16 .~..
azQ
17 jury.
MR. OW~NS: You're still leaving void those that are DR. PRESSLY: The ones that are elected by the grand
18
MR.. VANN: My judgment, the way it is now --
19 apparently the object is to try to bring a state board member
20 closer to the people I guess.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's not it. The present
22 method I think would be okay if we did not have the problem
23 with the school superintendent. I don't think anybody --
24
MR, VANN: The truth of the matter is I don't think
25 we've got a problem, we've got the potentiality of a problem.
PAGE 135
That's what you're saying.
2
MR. OWENS: You stated it clearly.
3
MR. VANN: We have had that potentiality of a
4 problem since 1945.
5
MR. OWENS: I really haven't given that much thought
6 to it, but the idea is we need to appoint a state superin-
7 tendent.
8
Now, my point is if that is the way you're going to
9 move then we need to elect the board.
10
@;;"z 11 oa..j..::..
14 ~ I;; :~z:
15 .:l
"a:
::l
16 ~...
oz
~
17 ::;
MR. GRAHAM: I'm going to be real optomistic here for a minute. Let's take the position that maybe the system we've got now provides the greatest check and balance we could have.
DR. OWENS: It does as I can see under the circumstances.
MR. GRAHAM: And let's just MR. VANN: I'd like to move we go with the system
18 we've got.
19
MR. GRAHAM: That was everybody's second choice.
20
MR. VANN: That is the superintendent and the bo_rd,
21 the process we now use.
22
DR. PRESSLY: How do we get around the fact -- I'm
23 tending to go in that direction, but how do we get around the
24 fact that for five I think he said different administrations
25 ehey have circumvented this thing by resigning ahead of time
PAGE 136
showing that they themselves feel that they need to be
2 selected really, or appointed.
3
MR. GRAHAM: When we get Dr, McDaniel's inter-
4 relationship list of what their duties ought to be I believe
5 he's probably going to tell us the superintendent shall be
6 responsible for enactment of the policies of the state board
7 of education, and I believe he's going to describe the job
8 as spokesman administrator,
9
CHAI.l<MAN MEREDITH: But accountable to the board,
10
"z
11 j:
."'o".-.
~ 12 ~
~J~ 14 !... '" % 15 .:l "'"::l 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
though, tlut accountable to the board, he's very clear on that MR. VANN: You said the enactment of policies, but
I think you meant the carrying out of the policies. DR. PRESSLY: Carrying out of the policies, not
enactment of them . MR. OWENS: Even at that, even if he puts it there
legally he is not bound and accountable to the board. Now this is the point. That is the word that he stated before,
18 it is there as law,
19
We have had superintendents in the past who have
20 followed through, done well under the circumstances because
21 a lot of fuss was raised one way or the other, a lot of
22 confusion, then it gets before the public and it makes it
23 maybe difficult for them to come back to another time, and
24 that's the way it's happened, but otherwise than that it has
25 worked. As you say, the only thing that is there, .and the
PAGE 137
superintendent recognizes it, he doesn't want to have to run
2 allover the state campaigning and he's satisfied the board
3 to a degree, he can come back an9ther year without going
4 through the expense of another -- another term rather. It
5 has worked.
6
What we're looking at is the possibility that it
7 doesn't have to always work, but I would rather accept it
8 the way it is than to go into appointing both the superin-
9 tendent and the board.
10
DR. PRE~SLY: I can't see the great danger of that.
I have a hard time seeing that.
MR.. OWENS: Do you want me to go through some of
the --
MR. HILL: What about allowing the board to fill a
vacancy, and then allowing the people to vote at the next
election?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's what's happening now.
18
MR. HILL: The board doesn't fill the vacancy, the
19 Governor fills the vacancy in the state school superintendent,
20 but if you let the board fill the vacancy in the state school
21 superintend~nt then they would at least if this had been the
22 system in the last 25 years, it appears that the board would
23 have appointed him.
24
CHAIID1AN MEREDITH: But that doesn't necessarily
25 mean that the same powers would be in that position no matter
PAGE 138
how the person gets there if they're called for in the
2 constitution, even if the board appointed htm.
3
It seems to me a person could fill the unexpired
4 term of the elected official, that person would have the same
5 rights as the elected official, the board couldn't fire him
6 either even if they appointed him.
7
MR, OWENS: You also have, then you don't have an
8 election -- I beg your pardon, you don't have an elected
9 official doing the appointing, and I don't see a big problem
10
~
Czl II j::
'o"
Q.....
12 ~
@ri
! 14 ... ':<"r
15 ~
Cl
'":;)
16 .~... Q Z <
17 :
with the fact that they have resigned in the middle and the superintendent has appointed them, I know it makes an incumbent run again and it gives them greater impetus over anybody else who wants to run in an open election.
The governors have been very astute in their appointments, picked some pretty good people through the years .
DR. PRESSLY: I want to ask Tom for a true
18 confession. Have you ever as you sat there on the board of
19 education resented or objected or felt insecure over the fact
20 that you did not control as a board the superintendent of
21
education?
22
I would think if I sat there
23
}ffi. VANN: You mean sitting as a member of the state
24 board of education?
25
DR. PRESSLY: Don't you feel "This man ought to be
PAGE 139
bossed by us"? He's your employee.
2
MR. VANN: You know the constitution says he shall
3 be the executive officer of the state board of education, but
4 the executive officer --
5
DR. PRESSLY: He is not subject to the board of
6 education, and he ought to be.
7
MR. VANN: Well, if you read APE~ I think you will
8 determine that he may very well be subjecti to the policies
9 established by the state board of education. There is no
10 question that he's subject to it, he's obligated to carry out
Czl
11 i= the policies, and the biggest area that all superintendents .'oa"....
~ 12 ~ say that there's ever likely to be any issue between boards
~Fi and superintendents is when boards enter the field of ! . 14 .administration.
I-
'"
J:
15 .:l
DR. PRESSLY: Right.
Cl
:':">
16 ~...
MR. VANN: I suppose the question defining when they
zQ
17 ~ enter the field of administration is something that's always
18 difficult, but you have some members of boardBof education
19 that are more active in their participation in it than others,
20 and I never have seen anything really bad come out of it.
21
We have had board members, though, that were
22 interested in getting rid of a superintendent, and I've never
23 seen anything bad come out of that.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Because they couldn't do
25 anything.
PAGE 140
MR, VANN: I guess what I'm saying to you is that
2 there wouldn't be any way that the state board of education
3 could terminate a state superintendent's services,
4
DR. PRESSLY: You just said you've known times when
5 individuals on the board wanted to get rid- of a superintendent
6 Suppose that wenethe majority of the board?
7
MR. VANN: You know, if it's one that's no good, but
8 if it's a majority --
9
DR. PRESSLY: What would you do?
10
"z
11 i=
e;1Io..l..l..: ! 14 ... '<"l :I: 15 .:l CI Ill: ::l 16 ~... Q z
17 :
MR, VANN: If he was appointed it's effective. DR, PRESSLY: No, he's not appointed, that's the reason I don't see how staying where we are -MR. VANN: You could operate in a manner of seeking to defeat him at the next election, or if you appointed him you could remove him instantly if the majority said he ought to go . DR, PRESSLY: If he's a scoundrel and ought to go,
18 you send him packing.
19
MR. VANN: None of our other political processes
20 work that way for elected officials, if he's a scoundrel you
21 just kick him out. You know, they afford them
We
22 provided the recall which we didn't have and which is
23 difficult, I'll admit that, but --
24
MR. OWENS: It takes his term almost to get a
25 recall.
PAGE 141
MR. VANN: Also if you come to the position of
2 appointing by the state board of education, it may take longer
3 than it takes the Governor to appoint.
4
The reason I say that is ordinarily they get into a
5 search process and they will be involved for some time in
6 consideration of a number of applicants.
7
Your concern we might have a larger range of people
8 to consider outside the state of Georgia is a valid one, but
9 I'm willing to trade that off really for the method that we
10 have because I think we can probably find an adequate and
11
"z
j:
..'o"....
more than adequate person from the state of Georgia.
~ 12 ~
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I have one thing --
~r~! MR. VANN: As a confession, I have never felt
14
I:zii:
uncomfortable,
sir, but frankly I have served under superin-
15 ~ tendents who are interested in the same thing I'm interested
"'";;)
16 .~.. in, and that's the furtherance of education in the state of
Q
Z
17 : Georgia.
18
uR. PRESSLY: We have had good ones, no question
19 about that.
20
MR. VANN: You can always have a scoundrel in
21 anything you do, and I guess the process of getting rid of
22 some scoundrels is not easy, but ordinarily eventually the
23 people get rid of them.
24
MR. OWENS: There is another way besides Mullins'
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's about what I was going
PAGE 142
to say, before we dismiss this I don't think we have given
2 enough thought to the alternative method of selecting the
3 board other than what Mullins has come up with. There may
4 be some other way ~hat would get that process to the people.
5
MR. OWENS: You spoke about the legislature and
6 all that which I don't look too favorably on, but the
7 legislatures are selecting it -- I don't remember the details
8 of the process, but that's the general term, they be selected
9 by the legislators or whatever, senators or what.
10
"z
11 io=r:
...o
l>.
~ 12 ~
~r~! 14 ... '" :I: 15 .: "or: :l 16 ~... Q Z 17 :;
MR. VANN: In theory, and sometimes practice doesn't follow theory, in my judgment the present appointment by the Governor is more likely to result in persons who are more concerned with the overall program of education in the state of Georgia .
The other process it seems to me, although I guess you might say it gets you down into -- it gets you in a more closer position to the people -- of course the Governor is an
18 elected official by all the people of Georgia -- then it moves
19 you down into where you feel more like the district from which
20 you're elected, you feel like your constituents are board
21 members and legislators rather than the people of Georgia,
22 and they're all important.
23
You know, right now you have to deal with the
24 legislature because they furnish us the money to do it, but
25 it seems to me like it generally might result in theory --
PAGE 143
whether it does in practice or not I don't know -- the searchin~
2 out of a person by the Govern~r who was interested in the
3 overall picture for education in the state of Georgia,
4
As a member of the state board of education I have
5 members of my district that contact me about problems and you
6 try to deal with them, but, you know, I was elected locally
7 and you had people that contacted you from the local view-
8 point on the board of education, but I don't think people
9 are going to -- I guess the question would be weare'~rpt
r
10 responsive to the people's needs, if that's the situation
I:l
.Z
11 j:
then perhaps so, but I really have never had that thown at
.f..
e~'1
us. Maybe some people think so, but if we're responsive to the.~eop1e's needs as is then that is the object of it
! 14 as far as I'm concerned.
Ii;
:I:
.15 ol) I:l
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Also the statement has ,cbeen made
::l
16 !..2. several times that the people would not accept two appointed
Q
17 =Z officials. Are we underestimating the people if they knew
18 what we have learned since we have been around this table
19 talking?
20
I mean if the citizens knew of the potential we're
21 trying to protect against their reaction might be somewhat
22 different. Who has the
23
MR. HILL: If you could get it to the people you
24 might be ab Ie to convince them. I think you'd have an eas ier
25 time convincing the people than you would the legislature,
PAGE 144
and since they're the group you have to get it through I 2 just think that --
3
MR. VANN: That it's not practical, but that doesn't
4 mean we shouldn't take a position like that.
5
MR. HILL: If we hadn't already been through this
6 exact question I wouldn't be so negative, but I mean it's as
7 if just yesteday practically we had this very question and
8 went through the whole process and --
9
MR. VANN: Hasn't this been addressed in the '60
10
"z
11 j:
.<o...I..t
~ 12 ~
(@JF~
! 14 !;; :~r
15 .:l
"<It
:l
16 .~.. zQ
17 :
constitution, the '69 constitution and in every constitutional revision committee that's come up?
MR. HILL: It was addressed, and not only that, on the floor of the senate there was a proposal to appoint the school superintendent and elect the school board members, it was just an amendment from the floor, and it passed in the senate this one amendment by a small majority, not by twothirds, but in any case
18
MR. VANN: In the initial '45 constitution?
19
MR. HILL: No, no, this constitution we had up there
20 this last session, in the '80 session, and so it is a real
21
i~tractible problem.
22
DR. PRESSLY: Don't you think that may have broken
23 down because it's almost impossible to elect the members of
24 the board? After all, they have to have full time salaries,
25 there are just so many things involved.
PAGE 145
MR. HILL: It wasn't well thought out, it was just
2 a proposal and it passed.
3
MR. HENRY: Don't you think the legislature would
4 react favorably to this caucus because it would give them a
5 direct voice?
6
MR. HILL: I would say the legislature was not
7 presented with anything other than these two. I have no idea
8 how they would react to something like the Washington plan.
9 It's possible, conceivable they would approve it, but it's
10 hard to say.
"z
11 i=
'o.."....
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. If they don't approve it
~ 12 ~ what do we have to lose?
(@)F~
MR. HILL: If this committee was in agreement with
! 14 ~
the Washington plan that would be fine, but I wasn't sure
'~"
%
15 .:I there was general consensus that that was a good way to move.
"'::">
16 .~..
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Are we all agreed that the
Q
Z
17 =~ superintendent should be appointed by t;:he board, and so if
18 it takes something like the Washington plan to express that
19 view then maybe we should do that, and if they turn that down
20 at least we've made it clear the position about the appoint-
21 ment of the superintendent.
22
DR. PRESSLY: How many of us would be willing to
23 take the position that the state superintendent be appointed
24 and that the board remain as it is?
25
I know you would be opposed to that.
PAGE 146
MR. OWENS: Yes.
2
DR. PRESSLY: How many others would be opposed?
3
I would like that as a motion that that be our
4 decision, that we suggest the state superintendent be
5 appointed and the board remain as it is.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Be appointed by the board?
7
DR. PRESSLY: By the board, and the board remain
8 as it is, just to see if we can get a majority in that
9 position.
10
"z
11 i=
.o.l>..=.. ~ 12 ~
~--i 14 ~ Iii % 15 olI "l>= ~ 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Does anybody care to second the motion?
MR.. GRAHAM: I second it. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It has been properly moved and seconded that the state superintendent be appointed by the state board of education and that the state board of education be constituted as it is presently. MR. GRAHAM: Let me ask if that would include the
18 advise and consent of the senate on the appointment of the
19 state superintendent?
20
DR. PRESSLY: I wouldn't object to that, but' I
21 don't think a board normally when it appoints somebody has
22 ever had anything like that override them.
23
CHAIR.MM4 MEREDITH: Any other unreadines s?
24
All right.
25
MR. VANN: The only objection I have to it is I
PAGE 147
just think it's probably impractical, that it may be
2 difficult to persuade ~he committee for both to be appointed.
3
DR. PRE~SLY: If we lose, we have come right back to
4 where we are, and that's our next best choice in my opinion,
5 so it's either one of these two. We either try it and we
6 fail, but if we fail we come back to something that is
7 functioning as you point out.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Any other unreadiness?
9
I call for a vote. All in favor of the motion say
10 aye.
"z
11 ~
e;1..'o".... 14 !... '<"l % 15 "'"::;) 16 .~.. Q Z <l 17 :
(Ayes. ) CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Opposed. MR. OWENS: No. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I vote aye . MR. HILL: How about this idea, though . CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Do we have a quorum? MR. HILL: Yeah. I mean the fact is the next time
18 you're going to be looking over a draft which is the result
19 of this meeting and your committee may have more people and
20 may turn it around. This certainly isn' t final by any means.
21
My question is whether we should incorporate into
22 the draft a provision of confirmation by the Senate of the
23 appointment, because that might add some of this accountabilit
24 and it wouldn't be enough to satisfy the people who want to
25 see him elected, but it would be more than to just give them
PAGE 148
carte blanche. Would you think that would be advisable?
2
DR. PRESSLY: It wouldn't worry me, but you mow how
3 little I know about state government. It wouldn't worry me
4 at all.
5
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Would you support that?
6
As a board member, Mr. Vann, would you have any
7 problem with that if the board selects somebody and then the
8 senate turns it down?
9
MR. VANN: Well, you know, no more prob lem than the
10
Czl 11 j:
.'oG".o.
@;i ! 14 Ii; <:zl:: 15 .:l Cl '":) 16 .~.. Q Z <l: 17 :
Governor would have I guess. It doesn't bother me, but I just wonder why.
MR. HILL: To add some accountability, that's all. MR. VANN: If we're going to start adding accountability, let's add it throughout the gamut of education. What about the regents? MR. HILL: In this case you're taking an elected official where you had absolute accountability to the public
18 and making him appointed, but if the appointment is subject to
19 approval by elected officials it somewhat mitigates the loss.
20 Yousee, that's all my suggestion is. In this case it might
21 add some support to the proposal that he be appointed if he
22 has to be approved by an elected body.
23
MR. GRAHAM: I remember the first meeting of this
24 committee, unfortunately I think this issue came up five
25 minutes after we convened, but the question is if the board
PAGE 149
is going to appoint him we're going to get back to a lot of
2 other questions, like for how long. Are they going to appoint
.3 him for a term, or at the will of the board?
4
MR. HILL: For one thing, the committee already made
5 a recommendation, the full committee approved it, so we
6 really will just go back to some of this that we already have.
7
MR. VANN: What did they recommend?
8
MR. HILL: I believe it was a four-year term and
9 serve at the pleasure, but every four years it would have
10 to be redone, but I'll have to go back and check it, I don't
have that here.
MR. VANN: I think my own jUdgment is the system we
have been using has apparently been stable and I'm not sure
what will happen if we go into something new. I don't know
whether it would be stable or unstable. You can't learn
except by experience.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We have taken care of 6 and 7.
18
DR. PRESSLY: Let's take care of the tummies. I'm
19 hungry.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Well, let's see, if we get
21 through this we'll be pretty well done.
22
MR. HILL: We should be able to finish in another
23 five minutes.
24
MR, GRAHAM: I think we have climbed the highest
25 mountains here.
PAGE 150
2 8?
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What about 8? Any problem with
3
MS. GREENBERG: I'm sorry. Did we go to 7(a) which
4 is at the top of page 3, "If appdnted, should the state school
5 superintendent be named in the constitution?"
6
MR. HILL: He will have to be now because we're goin~
7 to say confirmed by the senate, so that sort of took care of
8 that question.
9
CHAIRMAN 'MEREDITH: We don't need (b).
10
11 "ozc~....o..
@;i 14 .~.. <:zI:I 15 ~ "co ;) 16 .~.. oz 17 ~
"Should appointments to the state board of education be for seven years?"
Is that what it is now? MS. GREENBERG: That's the present term. MR. GRAHAM: I think we have answered that question . CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Number 9, no problem with Number 9, the Governor being a member of the board, be prohibited from being a member of the board?
18
MR. GRAHAM: Yes".
19
MR. VANN: Yes.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: "Should the method ot filling a
21 vacancy on the state board of education continue to be stated
22 in the constitution?"
23
MS. GREENBERG: The reason this question was brought
24 up was because you take a look at Section II, Vacancies, it's
25 about eight lines down, it could be provided for by statute
PAGE 151
rather than bem the constitution.
2
MR. HILL: As it is the constitution states unless
3 otherwise provided by law the Governor fills all vacancies
4 until the next election, he fills for the unexpired term.
5
DR. PRESSLY: Wouldn't it be pretty smart for us to
6 leave that as it is? I just think we should leave it as it
7 is so we don't upset any other applecarts.
8
MR. HILL: I'm saying it's already covered really by
9 another provision so that it could be eliminated without
10 making any significant change, but shortening it.
" 11 az~.o.:.
MR. OWENS: In other words, if the other things go
~--'I ~ ~ 12 ~ through and are voted on then this wouldn't be necessary as such':
14 !... '"<0(
15 ~:z:
"a:
::>
16 .~.. IzII
17 :
this~'
MR. HILL: It's already taken care of, really . CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. What is the result of
MR. GRAHAM: Take it out if it's somewhere else
18 provided for.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What about this part here that
20 says if the General Assembly is not in session the Governor
21 can Htill make the appointment without the confirmation?
22 This has a provision in the case that the vacancy occurs when
23 the General Assembly is not in fssion which allows for the
24 board by secret ballot to appoint to fill the vacancy, and if
25 we strike it, if we take this out are we providing for filling
PAGE 152
a vacancy when the General Assembly is not in session?
2
MR. VANN: At the present time it provides that a
3 vacancy that occurs other than by expiration of the term
4 would be filled by the state board until the end ot the next
5 session of the General Assembly, and then the Governor would
6 make the appointment with the advise and consent of the
7 senate.
8
I wouldn't have any objections to saying the
9 Governor would make the appointment to fill a vacancy all the
10 time.
<z:l
11 ~
MS. GREENBERG: But he needs confirmation of the
a _. !.o..... 12 ~ senate in this particular MR. HILL, He does in most cas es of appointments
14 ~ though so that it's really -- it's generally covered in
':"r
15 ~ another place and we were thinking that we could shorten it <a::l ;;;)
16 ~ here except it would make it a policy change, so maybe that's
oz
17: something you would rather not change, let the board fill it
18 as opposed to the Governor, but he's the one that ultimately
19 has to fill it once the General Assembly meets again and have
20 it confirmed by the senate.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Because, you know, you have the
22 problem if the vacancy exists for any period of t:ime and that
23 congressional district is without representation, and that may
24 have some impact on already in the minds of some people loss
25 of representation by having both people appointed.
PAGE 153
MS. GREENBERG: You clarify -- if the Governor
2 appoints, the Governor can appoint at any time, right,
3 without this provision? He just wouldn't have the confirma-
4 tion of the senate until the senate went back in session?
5
MR. HILL: That's right.
6
MS. GREENBERG: That's without this provision,
7 that's how it wouldbe.
8
MR.. HILL: Do you think the Governor should be the
9 one to fill the vacancy rather than the board? That's the
10
"z
11 t:
...olit
l>-
~ 12 ~
@r~
! 14 Iii :I: 15 .:l
CI lit
~
16 ~... D
17 Zg;
question. MR. VANN: There was some thought behind it to have
it this way. I was wondering if there was any potential of if the Governor appointed someone and the senate didn't approve it at be session -- I don't know why it's in here this way, there must be some
DR. PRESSLY: There must be some reason for it . MR. GRAHAM: If the state board is going to appoint
18 the superintendent, then I think the state board ought to fill
19 the vacancy.
20
MR. HENRY: Of a state board member?
21
MR. GRAHAM: Of the state board member, I'm sorry.
22
MR. HILL: That's what we're talking about, the
23 vacancy on the board, and --
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: The only reason for changing
25 this is you want to reduce, you want to make this section
PAGE 154
smaller, shorter.
2
MR. HILL: Not just that really. To some extent it
3 seems to be an awkward method of filling an appointment, have
4 the board fill the district that none of them are from.
5
It means almost as if the nine people on the board
6 from everywhere else except where the new board member is to
7 come from select him, so it seems to me the Governor would
8 be the more logical person to fill the vacancy.
9
MR. VANN: As a practical matter what happens is
10
.z"
11 i=
..o....
~ 12 ~
.~-I-J~, 14 >I'" J: ..15 .:l "::> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
that the board defers to ~he Governor, you know, he makes the recommendation .
MR. HILL: So he ends up doing it anyway. MR. VANN: They defer to that choice. It doesn't necessarily have to be that way, but that's the way it works. MR. HENRY: It's only a nine-month or less appointment anyway, and the Governor appoints after the General Assembly
18
MR. VANN: The only thought I could have in there is
19 that the Governor might be reluctant to appoint while the
20 General Assembly is not in session. I don I t know.
21
MR. HENRY: He does that now with other offices
22 where he has that ability.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Also the board would not be very
24 smart to appoint somebody that the Governor would not probably
25 want to reappoint.
PAGE 155
MR. VANN: That's what I say, as a practical matter
2 it says by death, regisnation or any other cause other than
3 the expiration of such member's term of office the Governor
4 shall appoint a successor who shall hold office --
5
MR. HILL: We're saying if we say that, it's already
6 stated elsewhere in the constitution that says that any
7 vacancy in a public office may be filled by the Governor
8 until the expiration of the term unless otherwise provided by
9 law, so that the Governor would in fact fill the vacancy in
10
"z
II i=
'o.l".L.
12 ~
~@F~" 14 ~ In :<zC: 15 .:I '""::;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 :<Ci
that situation. MR. VANN: I guess what we're talking about is the
advise and consent of the senate on that vacancy. This is dealing with if the senate is not in session because --
MS. GREENBERG: That's provided for under Article V, Section II, Filling of Vacancies. If you have your brown copies this is on page 33, Paragraph 4 .
MR. VANN: Article V, Section II, Paragraph 41
18
MS. GREENBERG: On page 33.
19
l~en any office shall become vacant, by death,
20 resignation, or otherwise, the Governor shall have power to
21 fill such vacancy, unless otherwise provided by law; and
22 persons so appointed shall continue in office until a
23 successor is commissioned. agreeably to the mode pointed
24 out by this constitution, or by law in pursuance thereof."
25
MR. VANN: I suppose the only difference is that
PAGE 156
I guess the state board of education is maybe the only state
2 board appointed with the advise and consent of the senate.
3
MR. GRAHAM: I think the board of transportation is.
4
MR. HENRY: The board is appointed by a caucus.
5 The rest of them are, though, the natural resources, offender
6 rehabilitation.
7
MR. VANN: They're appointed with the advise and
8 consent of the senate?
9
MR. GRAHAM: What about the regents?
10
MR. VANN: I believe they're appointed.
"z
11 ~
.""o."".
DR. PRESSLY: What you're really suggesting there
~ 12 ~ is that we just say in case of a vacancy on said board by
~r~ death, resignation or from any other cause other than the
! 14 t;
expiration of such member's term of office, and then take it
:I:
15 ~ all out until we came down there that the Governor shall
"""::;)
16 .~.. appoint the member .
azQ
17
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You know, the same language is
18 in the board of regents too, so there must be something --
19 the same language in the board of regents saying that in case
20 of a vacancy on said board by death, resignation, et cetera,
21 or for any other cause other than expiration the board shall
22 by secret ballot elect a successor.
23
DR. PRESSLY: There must be a reason for it. Let's
24 just leave it as it is.
25
MR. HILL: We will do some more research on this
PAGE 157
area. I think that some cleaning up can be done here that's
2 not going to -- Either way, if you leave it exactly as is
3 I think it could be cleaned up, I think it's too long.
4
MR. VANN: As a matter of research, do you know
5 whether these provisions in the state board of education just
6 originated in the '45 constitution, they didn't exist prior
7 to that time?
8
MR. HILL: I'm not sure.
9
MS. GREENBERG: The state board was not constitution~l
10 until the '45 constitution, it was statutory.
"z
11 ~
MR. VANN: Some of these things may have arisen out
o...
@ . --I12 : of, you know, the dispute that arose at that time when the Governor served on both boards. There was much agitation in
14 ~ the state concerning political participation in educational
'"
:I:
15 .:l matters.
"'";;)
16 ~
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: All right. Number 11, "Should
zQ
17 : the constitution continue to provide that the board shall have
18 such powers and duties as provided by law and existing at the
19 time of the adoption of the constitution of 1945?"
20
We requested that Dr. McDaniel provide us some
21 information on --
22
MR. HILL: He did. He did provide us with quite a
23 bit of information on this, and the fact is
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We asked him again today, John
25 asked him again today.
PAGE 158
MR. GRAHAM: I asked him again today. He said we
2 ought to be more specific, and I asked him if he would
3 recommend what --
4
MR. VANN: This is the same way the board of regents
5 language reads.
6
MR. HILL: You see, in this case the board of
7 regents we found that there's only so many statutes that that
8 refers to, it's about 35 different code sections, and of those 9 35 code sections most of them are redundant and just repeat
10 what's already in here, or they're matters that do not have to
be in the constitution, and so what we're doing is calling
forward into the constitution two or three that are of
constitutional significance and not having this reference
back because it creates a problem from the standpoint of
constitutional law as to what status these old laws have,
whether they have been elevated to the constitution so they
can't be repealed, and it creates a problem, so in ~he board 18 of regents we're going to clear it up.
19
Now, whether we can do the same with the state board
20 will depend on what Dr. McDaniel has to say in his memo.
21
MR. VANN: I don't really know, except it apparently
22 was an attempt to elevate the powers and duties of the state 23 board of education to constitutional level.
24
MR. GRAHAM: The first part of that sentence doesn't
25 bother me where it says that the said state board of education
PAGE 159
shall have such powers and duties as provided by law; you're
2 simply recognizing the General Assembly's right to enact
3 enabling legislation in the constitution.
4
You could end it there, take out "and existing at
5 at the time of the adoption." If that is the law then it's
6 already been provided for, you have already got it, you don't
7 have to worry about the tie-back in creating that issue.
8
MR. HENRY: But there is a concern that -- for
9 instance in the board of regents that they say -- and I'm not
10 sure what the law is on the state board, but in the board of
zCo'
11 ~ regents you have the lump sum appropration which is in effect .o0.-.
~ 12 ~ a limitation on the General Assembly's power to line item
@ ~r~ the department's budget, and so if there are powers in the
14! statutes that were given to them prior to '45 the General !;; <C %
15 Assembly can't come in and amend that statute, and then it ~ ;;)
16 .~.. may serve as a limitation on the powers of the General CI Z
17 =<C Assembly which you may want to retain or you may not want to
18 ret,lin, you may feel like you trust the General Assembly
19 enough to
20
MR. HILL: Eldon could not identify any such clause
21 that would relate to the board of education, any such thing
22 that he feels has prevented the board or limited the General
23 Assembly in any way, so we haven't found any such statutes
24 in the board of education, but when we get his memo back we
25 should have a better idea --
PAGE 160
MR. GRAHAM: I think the limitations we've got
2 we've written into our Article VIII, Section I, adequate,
3 you know, those general types of constitutional language.
4
I would be for taking out that.
5
MS. GREENBERG: Could we just vote on whether or not
6 we should take out the provision, and then as far as
7 determining what we have to add to the section, that would
8 come from the memo by Dr. McDaniel.
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Why don't we wait until we get
10
~
"z
11 i=
'o"
"-
1M
12 ~
~r~
14 .~.
'-:"z<:
15 ~
"'~"
16 ~
1M
Q
Z
17 l-:<i
the memo and then treat the question. MR. HILL: Yes. MR. VANN: I'm reluctant to say to remove it unless
I know what I'm removing, because it says the way I read it is that the state board of education shall have such powers and duties as provided by law and existing at the time of the adoption of the constitution of 1945. That may have elevated statutory law into constitutional law as far as powers and
18 duties are concerned, because it then goes on to say together
19 with such further powers and duties as may now or hereafter be
20 provided by law.
21
Now, I don't know why it was put in there in 1945.
22 Does it appear in the constitution of 19457
23
MS. GREENBERG: That's the original provision.
24
MR. HILL: If you're going to retain such provision
25 here, you might as well say as of the 1980 -- I mean there
PAGE 161
would be no reason to keep referring back to that
2 constitution, but it is the kind of thing we're trying to
3 eliminate if possible to clear up the confusion, and we can
4 do it with the board of regents, and I don't know whether we
5 can do it here.
6
MR.. VANN: Just see what powers and duties are
7 possibly vested in the state board of education as a
8 constitutional body by this language, if any.
9
CHAIJ.<MAN MEREDITH: Okay. Number 12, "Should the
10
"z
II j:
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
~ri 14 ~ l;; <:rII IS o1J "'";;;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 ~
composition of the state board of education be changed?';' I think we all agree that the answer to that is no.
Is that correct? We pass that by consensus? 13, "Should qualifications for members of the
state board of education be provided for in the constitution?" I think the statement is in reference to at the
level th~t is presently defined, currently defined . MS. GREENBERG: It deals with citizen of the state
18 five years --
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: No publishers.
20
MS. GREENBERG: No person employed in a professional
21 capacity, no person who is connected with or employed by a
22 school book publishing concern.
23
Is it the feeling that these should be constitutional
24 provisions, shoul,d we delete them in which case they would
25 probably be statutory conditions? Do we want to add other
PAGE 162
qualifications or 1imi~ations into the constitution?
2
MR. GRAHAM: I think we ought to try as much as
3 possible to make the state board of education open wi~hout
4 limitation in our constitution and rely on legislation if
5 we had to, but I would like citizenship requirement for the 6 state board of education for one.
7
Other than that, I don't know I would want any
8 limitations.
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You don't want those publishers
10
"z
11 ~..oa..:..
(~ ~)r12
~a:
~
on there because we know -MR. VANN: Let's leave it like it is. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's a real serious and
touchy problem, the whole problem of book se1ecti.on anyway.
! 14 1;;
DR. PRESSLY: You don't want people employed in
:<z:l
15 ~ private and public education, I would think.
"a:
::l
16 ~
MR. VANN: I assume the effort is to have this
Czl
<l
17: nonprofessional, and therefore I don't see anything wrong
18 with it.
19
MR. GRAHAM: Well, if we go about limiting everybody
20 we don't wanton it, then --
21
MR. VANN: That's not a big limitation.
22
MR. HENRY: The question is should it be
23 constitutional or statutory? You know, could not the public
24 policy of the state be better served by having it in the
25 statute?
PAGE 163
MR.. VANN: I don't know whether it should be
2 constitutional or statutory, but if it's constitutional it's
3 not subject to change other than by constitutional change.
4
MR.. HENRY: Should it be subject to change? That's
5 what I was bringing up.
6
MR.. VANN: Well, the three elements that are there
7 don't seem to put a great restriction upon --
8
DR. PRESSLY: What about representatives of dairies,
9 milk dairies, or school bus manufacturing companies.
10
MR.. GRAHAM: The president of the Blue Bird School
"z
11 t-
'o.."....
Bus Company.
There are all sorts of things as Mr. Vann
~ 12 ~ knows might be limiting factors -- anybody that sells
~r~! insurance, group term plans.
14 ti
MR.. HILL: Should there be a conflict of interest
<
:I:
15 ~ provision, a broader conflict of interest provision put in
"'";:)
16 .~.. here, or is that all strictly statutory?
Q
Z
<
17 :
To some extent if we would be able to show you
18 statutes that say this very thing, would that persuade you to
19 leave it up to the statute, or are these of enough significanc
20 to be elevated to the constitution?
21
MR.. VANN: I would assume since they were elevated
22 they must have been of significance at one time. Otherwise
23 I don't know why they are there at all.
24
MR. OWENS: Even though some of the things are there
25 with reference to qualifications, if he's going to be
PAGE 164
appointed we don't know, we're still in abeyance on that
2 point now if any of the qualifications should be different
3 than what they would be --
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We Ire talking about the board
5 now, we're not talking about the superintendent. We're
6 talking about the board, Number 13.
7
MR. OWENS: I was looking at 14. I'm sorry.
8
MR, GRAHAM: Is there general conflict of interest
9 type of language you might work out rather than limiting
10
"z
11 j:
'..o"....
~ 12 ~
~r~ ! 14 t:r; 15 ~ ":':"> 16 ~... Q Z 17 ::;
this? I'm sure that Mr. Vann could tell us any number of
people that could get on the state board who may have a conflict of interest.
MR. VANN: Yes. There are probably people serving in capacities in government who may have conflicts of interest on subject matters that come before them, and I guess the government is theoretically set up to provide through rules
18 of ethics or laws prohibiting their vote on it.
19
MR. GRAHAM: Why should the constitution deny a
20 bookseller the right to be on it if it doesn't deny a
21 dairyman the right to be on it?
22
MR. VANN: I don't know. The dairyman sells milk to
23 the schools just like the book pUblisher, but I suppose it
24 mllst be --
Of course, you could appoint ten book
25 publishers I guess, I don't know.
PAGE 165
DR. PRESSLY: Don't you believe it's because the
2 book publisher is statewide and the milkman is local?
3
MS. GREENBERG: Interestingly enough for the
4 Compt:ro11er General who is the insurance conmissioner, there's
5 nothing constitutional as far as qualifying him in respect to
6 not heing interested in the insurance industry. It could be
7 statutory, but it's not constitutional.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There's a big racket sometimes
9 about: these textbooks, and that's probably why it got in
10 here.
"z
11 i=
'o."..
MR. VANN: The first one is citizenship and
@ r l12 : residence -- you know, that's fine. The second one is apparently dealing with the
! 14 l-
theoretical lay professional category, and the third one is
ll>
<4(
:z:
IS ~ dealing with one specific category of conflict or financial
"'";:)
16 ~... interest I guess .
Q
Z
<4(
17 :
MS. GREENBERG: Could we try drafting that more
18 general provision, Mel?
19
MR. GRAHAM: I don't have any problem with the first
20 two. It seems to me if it's going to be with the advice and
21 consent of the senate that any of these other things could
22 come u~ there and be solved.
23
DR. PRESSLY: It seems to me you would answer your
24 problem here if in next to the last sentence you simply had
25 another sentence "No person who has a conflict of interest,"
PAGE 166
and just leave it up to them to decide if a person has a 2 conflict of interest. We can't name everybody.
3
In fact, I would sooner leave out the book fellow
4 and substitute the no conflict of interest. That would catch
5 him in a second.
6
MR. HIL~: This is so broad, no person who is or
7 has been connected with -- MY goodness, that could be taking
8 a broad scoop of people who have had nothing to do with it
9 really, just peripherally related, whereas if you say just
10
z~ 11 i=
.'oG".o.
12 ~
@rl ! 14 !;; :II: 15 .:l ~ '"::::> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
say conflict of interest as defined by law MR. VANN: What problem has this caused? I mean
for crying out loud, what's the -- You mean we ought to open it up to the -- The object is we shouldn't leave the restriction there?
MR. HILL: No, it's probably statutory now. MR. VANN: It's statutory because it's in the constitution too probably.
18
DR. PRESSLY: I think what you're saying is not so
19 much there's anything wrong with this, but they need to
20 broaden it by adding no conflict of interest, in other words
21 to pick up anybody else.
22
MR. VANN: I suppose this must be a choice of
23 conflicts, because as John said I guess you could find a lot
24 of citizens that would have some conflict of interest,
25 particularly on any particular issue. As a lawyer, you may
PAGE 167
have a conflict of interest.
2
I don't know, there must have been some basis for
3 our forefathers to be concerned about these issues; maybe we
4 don't need to be concerned about them today, but that's hard
5 to tell because it hasn't been possible to appoint someone
6 in this category.
7
I think the board probably has a strong sentiment
8 about this school book publishing thing.
9
MR. HENRY; I would think that the prohibition
10
"z
11 I-
.'o."....
@;i
against a person of this type serving, the prohibition being statutory would he just as effective as a constitutional statement.
I would imagine that at the time this came in it
14 .~.I. was -- there was some scandal or something and the people ~ :I:
15 ~ felt very, very strongly about it, and they amended this
"'";;;)
16 .~.. section .
zQ
17 :
MS. GREENBERG: This is the original.
18
MR. HENRY: This is 1945.
19
MR. GRAHAM: I would like to suggest we try for a
20 draft that keeps in the first couple of sentences and then 21 a general conflict of interest. Describing it in such terms 22 we may be creating a question some time down the road that 23 will have to be resolved exactly what that means, but it 24 would be clear that we are very --
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Language "such as" and don't
PAGE 168
use that, language such as a book publishing company 2 executive?
3
MR. GRAHAM: I agree with you book publishers
4 shouldn't be on the board, but anybody connected with book
5 publishing or has been, I don't know about- that.
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH ~ Can you guys do some research
7 on that for us and let's not try to resolve this one now,
8 then we can come back to it on the next time?
9
There are two issues so far.
10
\:I Z
11 i=
'~."..
~ 12 ~
~Fi ! 14 ~ ':<r":l: 15 .:l \:I '";;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 ::;
On Number 14 maybe we need to do the same with that
one because I don't think we want to sit here right now -it's clear from the action we have taken above that if the school board it seems to me, now I may be wrong, the school board is going to make the appointment, then some place somewhere as a minimum qualification should be established tha provides some guidelines for the school board, and if you agree with that then I think that we can't do that right now.
18
MR. OWENS: If it maintains -- if what we have done
19 today is maintained, then there should be some qualifications
20 set up py the board or whomever for the state superintendent.
21
Of course it's already on record I'm not in favor
22 of--
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Maybe we could answer the
24 question, then, should these qualifications be provided for
25 in the constitution? If the answer to that is no, then it's
PAGE 169
resolved.
2
How many of you feel strongly about the fact that
3 under the system that we have created that the qualifications
4 for the school board superintendent since he's now going to
5 be appointed by the board, which implies I think a professiona
6
MR. HILL: Why not residency? You know, that's one
7 of the qualifications that would not be added for him, so that
8 whatever his qualifications were to be would have to be
9 something to be determined by the board itself I would think.
10
MR. GRAHAM: If they are going to appoint, then they
"z
e;j11
j:
'o.."....
ought to
--
I
don't know that we need any qualifications
if
they're going to appoint.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Then some statement needs to be
! 14 !;; in here that authorizes the state board to appoint the
::z:
15 ~ superintendent, and there could be a corrollary statement
~
:;)
16 ~...
oz
that says to satisfy certain criteria or certain qualifica-
17 g tions as established by the board or something.
18
MR. VANN: At the present time the constitution
19 that the state school superintendent shall have such
20 qualifications, shall~ paid such compensation as may be
21 fixed by law.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Ex cept it would be fixed by the
23 board.
24
MS. GREENBERG: Or both. Do you want both by the
25 board and by the General Assembly?
PAGE 170
MR. WATTS: Just like the board of regents, what
2 does it say about the board of regents?
3
MS. GREENBERG: They don't provide for that.
4
MR. VANN: There's no provision for the chancellor
5 in the constitution.
6
MR. HENRY: It will go without saying that if the
7 board was going to choose someone that person would meet their
8 qualifications.
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It does not go without saying
10
z
" 11 j:
.~ o
~
1M
12 ~
~/~ ! 14
t; -:zc:
15 .:l
"~
:)
16 ~
1M Q
-Zc 17 :
because you could define, for example, the person has to be 35 the person has to be -- I mean that's a minimum criteria, that could be called for either by statute or by constitution, and so the board would be prohibited from appointing somebody who is not, for example, a resident of the state if that's called for here.
MR. HENRY: If yO'll want to limit the board in its-
selection, I agree, but if you want to say shall meet such
18 qualifications as established by the board without any other
19 limitations in there, then I would think that would be
20 redundant is what I was saying.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I didn't hear the first part of
22 it.
23
DR. PRESSLY: I think there ought to be a statement
24 in here that he has to be a professional educator. I don't
25 think we ought to have a state board that is appointed, lay
PAGE 171
people who under some circumstance might come up where they
2 wanted a lay person, and I don't think that would be right.
3
MR. GRAHAM: How do you define a professional
4 educator?
5
DR. PRESSLY: I don't want to define it, I just want
6 somebody who's experienced in education.
7
MR. GRAHAM: We could say he has to be adequate.
8
(Laughter .)
9
DR. PRESSLY: We could just sayan educator, don't
10
"z
11 ~
'o.."....
~ 12 ~
@ri 14 !... '<"l :I: 15 01) "'"::;) 16 ~... Q Z <l 17 ::;
use the worn professional, if you like. I do think we want an educator in that position myself.
MS. GREENBERG: Do you want to keep the General Assembly out of determining those qualifications? Would you rather leave it up to the board?
DR. PRESSLY: I would leave it up to the board, but I do think the board ought to be restricted to that extent .
MR. GRAHAM: Sometimes people say educators don't
18 make good administrators.
19
MR.. OWENS: I'm glad you used the word sometimes.
20
DR. PRESSLY: Sometimes, yes. But I can't
21 conceive
22
MR. VANN: I don't think they presently require --
23 I think they presently require that he have three years of
24 experience in the teaching field, but I don't know whether it
25 requires that he be in the educational field at the present
PAGE 172 rr------------------ ----------------------------,
time, but that is by statute.
2
MR. HILL: We had already worked out some language
3 in the prior draft that this committee had approved, so we're
4 going to go back and take a look at that.
5
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could you also look at what the
6 other states say about where the superintendent is appointed
7 by boards just to see what --
,.
8
MR. HILL: How often they state the qualifications?
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What kind of qualifications are
10 put.
@);;"z 11 i= '..o"....
I think what we really want to do is have some
minimum qualifications, we don't want to
If we're going
to do that, then we may as well select the superintendent in
14 .~.. another fashion. The board has to have some leeway when given OIl 00( :r
15 ol) authority to do it, to appoint a person that they think is
"':">
16 ~... capable of doing the best job, but I think that some minimum Q Z 00(
17 g qualification statement should be included as sort of a base.
18 Would you look for that in the other places?
19
DR. PRESSLY: I think we've got a much better chance
20 of getting an appointed superintendent if we have some
21 qualifications listed.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Right.
23
Okay. Is there any other business?
24
Are we taking care to make sure that where we have
25 made changes that we're recommending some statutory changes
PAGE 173
to provide for any voids that may be created? Have we kept
2
MR. HILL: We haven't drafted anything yet, so we
3 haven't known what we're omitting, but we certainly will from
4 here on become sensitive to that.
5
DR. PRESSLY: What is this Article X, Section II?
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Oh, yes, that's one of them.
7 That's Article X, Section II, the section on scholarships
8 and retirement.
9
MR. HILL: This is really just an organizational
10 question, but the fact is we have an Article X which was
11
"z
j:
.'oG".o.
revised previously by another committee,
and Section II of
Q~ ; i Article X relates to educational scholarships, loans and grants, and they have completely revised that entire section, 14!... and that's not part of your subject, but my thought and the
':"z:
15 ~ Office of Legislative Counsel had suggested that this entire
"'";:)
16 .~.. article could be eliminated from the constitution if
oz
17 ::; Section II were transferred to the education article since
18 that's what it deals with, and Section I on retirement
19 systems would be transferred to Article IX, so it's really
20 just an organizational thing, and I'm just wondering if you
21 would object, if this committee would object to that transfer
22 being made.
23
Now, you won't have anything to do with the
24 substance of the change, that has already been done, it's
25 just an organizational question.
PAGE 174
MR. OWENS: It would have to be -- if we're going to 2 meet the other parts you're talking about in Section II,
3 then it would need to be transferred, so that is the thinking
4 you have for transferring it?
5
MR. HILL: Yes.
6
MR. GRAHAM: I don't have any objection if it
7 doesn't compete with anything that we are doing. Do you see
8 there's any conflict in it and what we're doing?
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: If we vote to put it over in
10 Article VIII, then --
MS. GREENBERG: This is a question we ask all the
subcommittees on Article VIII. It's just a transfer since it
deals with education. We feel all the educational provisions
should be in one article.
MR. HILL: It's not within your bailiwick, and it
doesn't conflict with anything you're doing, it's just that it
was placed in Article X, dealt with in Article X, but now
18 that we're revising the whole constitution we're just looking 19 at ways to tighten it up, and this was one way.
20
MR. GRAHAM: I think we ought to agree that any-
21 thing concerning education in the constitution ought to be
22 in the article on education.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Could I get a motion to the
24 effect this body does not disapprove of that transfer?
25
MR. OWENS: So moved.
PAGE 175
MR.. GRAHAM: Seconded.
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Consensus?
3
Okay. All in favor of the motion. Any unreadiness
4 on the motion?
5
Do you follow where we are?
6
MR. VANN: I'm in favor of it.
7
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There are no objections, then.
8 Consensus.
9
DR. PRESSLY: What would you do, just give it
10
"z
11 i=
.'o.."...
~ 12 ~
@~)r1~4! !;; ~ :J: 15 ":'") 16 .~.. za ~ 17 :
another section number? MR. HILL: We would probably add a 10. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Actually you don't save any
pages, though, right, because you're going to transfer everything back there to Section VIII, then everything on retirement to Section IX.
MR. HILL: That's already been reduced . MR. HENRY: It's beEl1revised. You probably voted
18 on it in '78.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I think we have done our
20 task for today, and we will reconvene on the 18th of August
21 at nine o'clock.
22
(Whereupon, at 1:30 p.m. the subcommittee meeting
23 was adj ourned . ) M
~
+++ ++ +
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on July 28, 1980
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7-28-80
Proceedings. pp. 3-4
SECTION I: PUBLIC EDUCATION
Paragraph I:
Public ~ducation; free public education prior to college or postsecondary level; support by taxation.
Adequate public education. pp. 5-6, 11~17, 24-25, 33-37, 39-42, 47-48, 70-111
Private schools. pp. 6, 42-54, 66-69, 111-125
SECTIONS II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, and III: STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT
Appointment. pp. 6-11, 17-22, 25-26, 28-33, 37-39, 55-62, 125-157 Composition of State Board of Education. pp. 9-10, 26, 161 Powers of the State Board of Education. pp. 39-47, 60-61, 157-161 Qualifications of members. pp. 10, 26-27, 161-172
SECTION VII: Paragraph I:
EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
Educational assistance programs authorized. 173-175
pp. 27,
PAGE 1
STATE OF GEORGIA
SELECT COMMITTEE
:. .1
ON CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
SECTION IX SUBCOMMITTEE ON LOCAL SCHOOL SYSTEMS
Room 416(a)
'",
State Capitol
Atlanta, Georgia
Thursday, July 31, 1980 1:30 p.m.
PRESENT WERE: COMl-ITTTEE MEMBER.Ci: MR. DONALD THORNHILL, CHAIRMAN MS. DOLORES COOK SELECT COMMITTEE STAFF: MR. MELVIN HILL MS. VICKIE GREENBERG OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL: CYNTHIA NONIDEZ EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT COUNCIL: DR. JU1 MULLINS GOVERNOR'S POST SECONDARY EDUCATION COMMITTEE: DR, DAVID MORGAN DEPARTMF.NT OF EDUCATION: DR. JOE FREUND. VOCATIONAL DIRECTOR GEORGIA SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION: MR. ROBERT WHITAKER OTHERS: DR. JACK NIX, FORMER STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDANT MR. CHUCK PYLES
I'}
r-------------- _ . _-_.._._ ...._ ..-.
PAGE 2
I
j !I
PROCEEDINGS
2
II
i!
10:00 a.m
11
.~ :I
CHAIRMAN DON THORNHILL: Well I think it would be
I'
,i
best for us to introduce ourselves so we will all know who is
here. I'm Don Thornhill from Columbia County and I am chairing
u this particular Subcommittee as we look at the Constitution
, Articles dealing with local school systems. We've been taking
a look at the various areas within the Articles of local school
') i systems and this is going to pretty well wrap up our hearing
I,) part of the study that we've been doing and hopefully at our
next meeting we will be looking at a draft that our staff is
r>
going to prepare for us that we can kind of hammer out and work
~: out the bugs and present that to the total Committee in early
September.
Why don't we start right here with Dr. Nix.
Dr. Nix, just go ahead and --
1 I:':;
DR. NIX: I'm Jack Nix, John Q. Citizen.
CHAIRMAN THORmIILL: Former State School Superintend-
ant and a mighty fine one at that.
DR. NIX: Thank you.
JIM MULLINS: Jim Mullins, Educational Improvement
Council.
:.)
CINDY NONIDEZ: Cindy Nonidez, Office of Legislative
.. ;. Council.
MELVIN HILL: Melvin Hill, Staff for the Select
PAGE 3
Conunittee.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Vickie Greenberg, Staff for the
Select Conunittee.
DAVID MORGAN: Governor's Post Secondary Education.
COURT REPORTER: I'm Mary Lou Stokes your Court
Reporter.
DR. JOSEPH FREtmD: I'm Joe Freund, Vocational
! Director from the Department of Education.
CHUCK PYLES: I'm Chuck Pyles. I'm Assistant to the
Staff Assistant or the Deputy Assistant of the Staff of the
.i
-< h
Constitutional
revision,
part time or
whatever .
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We have a couple of other
visitors with us.
ROBERT WHITTARD: I'm Robert Whittard with the Georgia
School Board Association.
:1
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Very good.
We have been following a procedure where we have had
.') a decision a~enda for us to look at today and we will be looking
at a number of things dealing with vocational education, some
of the State schools and schools for exceptional children.
'J
Mel, I'm just going to turn the meeting over to you
and let you kind of direct it on through.
MELVIN HILL: Okay. I have distributed to the speak-
ers prior to this meeting a copy of the decision agenda so they
would know in advance the kind of things we're interested in.
4
The topic is in front of us because this Committee was asked to
review Sections VII, VIII and IX of Article VIII of the Consti-
tution and this is Section Nine on special schools, on which
there is about a page in the Constitution that relates to this.!
In the effort to revise the Constitution we wanted to know what
to do with this section and generally should anything else be
added to the Constitution in this area.
So that was the reason for this decision agenda and
as I've -- as Vickie has mentioned to each of the speakers,
jU this is only a jumping off point and anything related to this
'1": 1! topic is certainly of interest to the full Committee .
.:>
~'J.V~'\
1-'" I.:
So I would suggest we follow this format and just go
('C-l~''":--;J' )' r"'-"'""".
\~~,/f I
~,
~
down
the
decision
agenda
with
each
one
of
the
guests
and
let
'-.
J4 ) each one of the guests in turn respond to it. And we can have
<"'
r
15 ~ a general discussion after each question and then at the end
we can have just an open discussion about any other topics.
l:
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: All right. Very good.
MEL HILL: Okay, the first question is, "Should the
Constitution contain any special provisions at all respecting
I
:::0 'Vocational Trade Schools?" "Yes, or no", and this is the broadIi
21
I er question and then we get into the specifics with the other
subquestions.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Why don't we let Dr. Nix respond
.' I and then Jim and then Dr. Freud and David Horgan.
DR. NIX: Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee
PAGE 5
------,
and Staff, let me start out by simply saying that I'm doing I
something I promised myself I wouldn't do three years ago and
that is get myself involved in the business of education after
spending about almost thirty-five years in it. I'm really some-
what disappointing myself by even being here. But as I told
the little lady, I think that's the one that called me over
there, I think I gave or she thinks I gave her a hard time ". I guess. But that's part of the reason why I gave you a hard
time. I will probably say things here that some of you or
most of you or maybe all of you will not agree with. I'm not
1,
!; looking for vo tes anymore. So as the little boy says, I'm just
I
"..'2jJi.j
" going to let it all hang out. Your first question here, and
I'd 1\/I(;-~~-'"-,-.~~'-"- \\='\J\.,C "/U'""/!"\';; like to comment about some things you don't have on this
",
:i; particular sheet before I leave here.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Feel free. We'd like for you to.
DR. NIX: Your first one that says, "Should the Con-
~
':J stitution contain any special provision for Vocational Trade
Schools?" I checked that, "Yes", but I want to explain to you
!l}
what I mean by that. I think that your Constitution should
contain only the framework for an educational program or system;
and that it should not be so specific that you try to spell out
'in a Constitution what all's contained in the word education.
I think that should be done by statutory provision and by rules
and regulations of the State Board of Education, things that you
can change much easier than amending the Constitutioni~~~lf..-,_
6
I would simply say that my qualified, "Yes", means
that the State Board of Education ought to be authorized to pro
vide occupational or vocational or trade education,whatever you
want to call it. It's really occupational, is what we're talk-~
ing, putting people to work. That's what I always tried to say
that Vocational Education happened to be; to give people the
knowledge and to teach them the maniuplative skills they need
to get a job and to hold a job; not just to get it, but to get
it and hold it. Now to me that is vocational or occupational
education and it is not just a trade that -- in the narrow
1
;.:
,i :: sense that a lot of people call ita trade. I would simply say .,,. '" that the State Board of Education should have the authority un-:
der the broad framework of the Constitution to provide that
, kind of an education.
<
I " ,~,
CHAIRMAN : Okay, Jim.
1 (~ { 't."1
DR. JIM MULLINS: Well I basically espouse the same
--(
I ~! I
"""
philosophy
as
Dr.
Nix.
The Constitutional statement as presentT
!8
I
i ed in Section Nine does allow for this as is now stated, but itl
I
19 :1 also requires that there be a local legislation and a referen- I
20
I
dum by the people before these are established. I think.I woulf
2\
antinue to support that view for a number of reasons.
I
think
I I
first of all we are all familiar with the Thomas County situa~
tion of a couple years ago. The local Board wanted to create
a college and so through local legislation that was possible.
Now whether this particular section allows it or not I don't ,
~_ _
_._._
- - - .._ -." ._ _.- _ _ - _ . _ - - - _.._--_._ _ _._.-.------.!
PAGE 7 know. But it does by term of developing special schools be-, cause it doesn't go into the full definition of what a special' ! school is, s'O you've basically got whatever you want to call .; a special school. The local legislation process is not always the best of processees in the General Assembly. Normally all I legislation comes up at twelve noon when everybody is gone to lunch except for a very few. Then it's sort of a trade off. ! You don't bother mine and I won't bother yours unless, of cours~, 'i there's something that everyone had been made aware of there's
I
I!' a problem coming; like the Sandy Springs vote. The issue, how-' ., ever, here is that there is a mechanism for giving the people
'-
J a choice as to what they want to tax themselves further for, as opposed to just reciting it in the General Assembly or with any other department of Government. So from that standpoint I
1:
I) .~ think it might be important to leave it some much, somewhat as t.:.
) \ it is. But I agree with Dr. Nix that we shouldn't confound our Constitution with the details of how you carry these things out;,
'. but rather give the broad general authorities. CHAIRMAN nIORNHILI.: Okay. MR. DAVID MORGAN: I agree with the two previous
I, speakers. I don't have anything to add. CHAIRMAN nIORNHILL: Dr. Freund. DR. JOSEPH FREUND: Likewise. I think this is some-
thing that we cannot predict many years down the road, and most Constitutions we assume are going to last many years down the
road. What will happen and what kinds of changes the changes
in society or technology -- well we can't even guess what chang
es we're talking about -- and I think it should give them the
4 authority, the Constitution should give the Board of Education
the authority to have schools and after that we need to leave it'
up to statutes and the State Board of Education Rules and Regu-
lations.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: From what I -- all of you are
agreeing then that the Constitution should address the business,
, of Vocational Schools or Trade Schools per se, vocational, the
II : word vocational.
::>
o
,
~_:
MR. DAVID MORGAN: It seems to me that it should be
N.~!\,'/j'".i
.((;'Lj))r!~"'" addressing who has the responsibility for Vocational Education
..
/ .'/
in the state. I think I would disagree maybe with that wording.
j:
!~ 1 1m not sure Vocational Trade Schools is the name we use anyway,
DR. FREUND: I prefer Vocational Education too.
;" Ii
MR. DAVID MORGAN: Yes. Well I do too. And it may
;J be, as Joe is making some comments that lie ahead, it may be
I
'I that in the future we don't provide Vocational Education throug~
I
trade schools or through post-secondary facilities, whatever.
But this does not include, as I understand it, the reference to
Highschool Vocational Education. Maybe it's meant to, but the
way I read it it is not. That seems to me also something that i
the State Board of Education should be given the authority for. :
PAGE
9
DR. JIM MULLINS: Would that not be part of the com-
school structure? Which they are already authorized to
have.
MR. DAVID MORGAN: I don't know.
DR. JIM MULLINS: I think the Attorney General opin-
ions and the definitions, I think it would fall into that cate- I
i gory, if it's within the K to 12 range.
When you start talking trade schools most of the
i times we're thinking of the post-secondary structure.
MR. DAVID MORGAN: Right, that's what I was thinking
(~
I
;.: about, but I was wondering whether this (1) was meant to includ~
.~~
~
1. ~; more than post-secondary schools.
~
DR. JIM MULLINS: It does, when you start talking
about special schools like for exceptional children.
1:
DR. JOSEPH FREUND: In order to receive Federal
:1
!:; "itl' funds for Vocational Education a sole state agency must be id-
entified and now it is by statute that the; sole state agency
I"~ that is identified is the State Board of Ecudation. There are
I) oth.er deliveries I there's other delivery systems for voca-
,".)
r
tional education in the state; namely the Board of Regents.
However. any Federal Vocational Educational funds that they re-
ceive come from the State Board of Education as now Constitutes.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: When we get into Vocational
Education we're really talking about a lot of things. We're
talking about the vocational education programs that you find
PACE 10
within the scope of a comprehensive Highschool for example,
your business education programs and that sort. Or you're
talking about the Area Technical Schools that we have. So
DR. JOSEPH FREUND: And more and more your Junior
Colleges.
,,.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: And your Junior Colleges.
DR. NIX: Mr. Chairman, let me add one more thing.
Paragraph six, where it says, "independent systems continued,
new systems prohibited", in your Constitution of this sheet.
I guess you sent this to us, little lady. It says that --
,, ,,
VICKIE GREENBERG: That's on page 68 of the --
o-
j.~ ~;
DR. NIX: Okay. I think there are three words.
You are talking about Boards of Education on a local basis and
.~ ,-- that's what Section V is dealing with right? Hunh?
I
1) ..",
MELVI~ HILL: That's right.
J;:
:J
i () 'y" ,~
DR. NIX: Okay, and if this is a part of Section six
C,
7.
l
i
;
paragraph six under Section Five, three words -- two words.
;k It says 'the words, "college". I don't think local Boards of
IlJl Education ought to be building and operating colleges. So if
you've got any place other than that in the Constitution where
that is contained. Especially DeKalb College out here. In my
judgement DeKalb County Board of Education really ought to turn
that over to the Board of Regents and let them run it. I don'ti
think that the DeKalb County Board of Education operating a
PACE 11
they ought to run the DeKalb Area Tech School, but not the
college.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Didn't we handle that or deal
with that issue somewhat?
MELVIN HILL: Yes, in an earlier meeting --
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: In an earlier meeting --
.,
MELVINI HILL: -- this was discussed and the Commit-
tee had decided to delete that from the new version.
DR. NIX: Well I didn't -- so if I bring up something
. \ that you've already rehashed then just tell me and I'll --
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: In essence we agreed with what
you just said.
MELVIN HILL: Okay, next .. VICKIE GREENBERG: The Constitution under the State
! :,: Board of Education does not state the jurisdiction of the
~'
,:, State Board. It just provides what their powers should be
c:
DR. NIX: Shall be a State Board.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Right. So if we're addressing
;'_i Vocational Schools somewhere in the Constitution, shouldn't we
address by the same token secondary and elementary education
possibly address it specifically. It's not evex mentioned ex-
cept under Local School Systems?
DR. NIX: Well there should be a section of the Con-
stitution. I don't recall it now -- I tried to forget all that stuff for the last three years -- but there should be a provis-
PAGE 12
ion some place in that Constitution that there shall be a Statf Board of Education responsible for public education in this .\ State.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Hell there is not presently any such provisions.
DR. NIX: No.
'/ :i
MELVIN HILL: It says that the State Board shall
have such powers and duties provided by law the effective date
9 of this Constitution of 1945. So it was by reference.
10
DR. NIX: And the Legislature -- well they can accept
11 gifts and monies and all that kind of stuff, the State Board
,~'.'
l' can, right?
MELVIN HILL: Yes. That's a specific authorization
in another place.
. J -- -" ,~
DR. FREUND: Let me further confuse this then. I
J
16
<Xl
Z
1':"1
.:J
don't
know
if
it's
in
statute
or
the
Constitution,
but
there
~
7
~-
,~ is a State Board for Vocational Education. Now the State Board:
I of Education is designated as also State Board for Vocational 'I Education.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Yeah, that's the statute.
21
DR. FREUND: That's statute.
MELVIN HILL: The question that Vickie raises though
is, I think, is whether there should be some statement about
the jurisdiction of the State Board over Vocational Education.
I mean, whether that's going to become too awkward with the
- - ., - - ~-- --- ------- ._- - . ---~. _..- -~--~---- ----_._.- --_..._ - - - - - -
---_. ---------- -- ----~._.__
13
jurisdiction over Vo-Tech also residing in the Board of Regents
to some extent in another area. That really gets to another
question a little later, whether there should be any -- what
3
! shall the Constitution say about it or should it continue to be:
silent?
DR. NIX: Hell now my idea on that would be probably
I:
for the protection of the State and for confusion in the future:
and I guess Joe's already run into this. I ran into it back
(. in the early 60's when I was the Director of Vocational Educa-
:\ tion. I think it would be helpful if you had some place in the '~.:J Constitution saying that the State Board was responsible for
'"',..)
" Vocational Education. I know there's some questions on down
there and I may be jumping the gun on it, but the State Board
and the State Board of Regents should have the power to con-
1: ,~: tract with one another in the Constitution or cite by statute
\ f or someplace. If it's in statute, it would be better in statute
because the Legislature could modify it when they needed to.
You can tell by this that I'm opposed to a third board, where-
') ever tha t is down there.
Ii
DR. JIM MULLINS: Of course, there is a problem. If
you were to establish in the Constitution that the State Board
','I of Education would be responsible for all Vocational Educa-
tion because of the mixed Government factions that you already
have in existence, Bainbridge, Dalton, Clayton coming up. If
we do assume one day DeKalb, and that's a question that is now
l-'.c\.C;'E: 14
within their own ranks as well as with the other one at Bruns-
wick. So you already have these combination ownerships so to
speak. So if it is then taken over then you've got the questio~
of how to handle that particular problem. As it is now with
your special school Section, your local laws and such as that,
you do have a way at least of getting the schools that you need
based upon, you know, the justification and the will of the
people.
Now that doesn't get you into Governments and that's
;u another question that we ought to address in a little bit.
DR. NIX: But now,Jim, what you're talking about here
that any construction that the colleges presently from the Board '\-/(~"':L)V~8'\,1:\)r~!"":"u ,! of Regents' standpoint are funds that are appropriated by the
'\ '. </J/
:1 State. The local people don't have to get those from the gov-
15 ,'" ernrnen ts .
DR. MULLINS: No, they don't have to do that.
I)
DR. NIX: But initially we had local Boards of Educa-\
I
tion provide a portion of the funds for construction and then
in order to get some of the schools built we had to get most
any kind of framework we could get our hands on because in some
21 places the schools' people, Boards of Education and Superintend~ , ) ants and Principals, they just wouldn't touch an area school.
We had to go outside the system, such as up at Lanier Tech and
I happened to be on that Board, and I've been trying to get
2~; them to do away with that Board and turn it over to the County
'_1- ,_..
.. _ .
._,
_. _ _.-- --~--__ .
_
Pr\CE 15
Board of Education, where, in my judgement, it ought to be.
Down in Troup County we couldn't -- There were four Boards of
Education down there and we couldn't get a single one of them
to accept the responsibility for the area school. Out of all
of this came the Woodall Amendment that was passed in November,
!
1960, I believe it was. I think that's the Section of the Cons~
t~tution. That's how we got schools where Boards of Education " wouldn't touch them. But we do have a kind of a hodge podge
set.up on this thing. But I think what you need to do if you
are going to improve things is to try to structure what ought
','J
" to be and then work from where we are to that. And then if
-,:.J
~ you give the State Board of Education the responsibility for
Vocational Education and name them as that responsibility, then f J the Legislature still has the authority under the Constitutuion
to pass a statute that would provide for the contractural
arrangements for Brunswick, Dalton and those places. Because
you now Joe?
have, I guess, a contract with them already don't you~
I
DR. FREUND: The agreement is written up.
DR. NIX: I mean an agreement between you.
DR. FREUND: Between the Board.of Regents and the
Board of Education.
DR. NIX: So you could do that by agreement, where
you have those kind of a situation. Because I don't think we
are going to build any colleges right away, not the way the
enrollment happens to be. DR. MULLINS: No. DR. FREUND: Jim, you made a reference to, "If the
people want a school, they would have to vote on it" '. DR. MULLINS: Under this provision, under the special
schools they said it would go to -- There would be local legislation that would then go to the people for a referendum.
'''':
DR. FREUND: Are you interpreting that that Gwinnett 'I County could not start a Vo-Tech school unless they had a refer-
endum? DR. MULLINS: I didn't interpret it that way. That's
a mechanism that this thing provides for if they did want one, ,lor take the onew that's coming up now, maybe the Dodge County, " but the means for funding, I think, give a lot of control to
that and the statutes give a lot of control to that, because
I).'
~ you are going to come in with your Federal funds and you're go-'
1c:.
, ing to combine that with your State funds and that becomes an overriding factor as far as reality of something happening. DR. NIX: Could I ask Jim something? CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Sure. DR. NIX: Jim, do you think the new school coming up in Gwinnett ought to be operated by the Gwinnett County Board of Education? Or should it be another Board?
I
DR. MULLINS: Oh, I think it should be by Gwinnett unless it's going to be an Area School and that it ~ll draw
PAJ~E 17
from the area. I'm sure of that, but then the area that it'll
draw from is that they can go to anyone of these places. I
think that particular school and the way the department en-
visioned it and the way the Gwinnett County Board envisions
it that it would be under the local Board of Education if they
got it from the State Board. I agree to that structure.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: That's the way Augus ta is.
DR. NIX: That's the way they all are except four
or five of them or seven.
DR. MULLINS: Of course, you've got some problems
It ..
.)~
::)
too,
you know,
that have
come forth,
like we can have a
local
"'
l...plJ~'C!"
:: system and I think Joe brought, this out at one meeting not too
(((~:;?))("~~" '~ many -- a couple of months ago. If you have a local Board of
.::/' ii
'. Education that has one of these schools under its control and
i:' '.;' decides it no longer wants to support it or expresses the lack
.,
,_
,1'
1:;.: of support by not applying the dollars necessary to give it
~
~" adequate operation, what do you do with it?
DR. NIX: Well, Jim, let me say this. In that ease
!'I
I if the school, if the public pressure would not force the Sup-
ertendant of the Board to continue it ought to close. Because
if the Director and the staff have operated the school that's
really doing what it ought to be doing, there would be so much
public support they couldn't possibly go.
DR. MULLINS: Theoretically speaking.
DR. FREUND: Right now I do not know of any provi-
PAGE 18
---,
sion that would allow for the State to take it over.
i
DR. MULLINS: No there's not any. DR. NIX: I know the school, the Lanier Tech up there i
I chaired up a little committee to come up with a salary supp-
) lement from local funds. We came up with a cross the board
starting at $145 a month local supplement for the instructors
at the sphool. We went to the County Commissioners. I went
x before the County Commissioners with the Director and some of
c) his staff and we got them to give us some more tax money to do
10 that. Well the reason we did, we had the facts and figures
c)
Ii z there showing the plants where they came into the area up there~
where they had said that they came solely because of that school
',I",:";>fr:jY~/>');~~= i; and what it was doing for them. We had the amount of ta~ that
. /1
'J>
Ie: ).. each one of those companies was paying in County taxes, and a
~:;
L1 r'
"r
<I
five
year
record
of
how much
the
county had
contributed
to
this
II, "c,'z"'"":: school and the percent they were contributing considerably.
z:
17
"~:
.n
And
they were not
contributing
10% of
the
taxes
that
these
I \.', industries were paying. We didn't have a dissenting vote on
\':1 the thing. I just don't believe that where a school is doing
.'.J.I.l\ a good job that the people in the business industry is going
21 , to let the thing close. If they do it ought to close.
DR. FREUND: But there are some schools where the
local governments provide zero support.
DR. NIX: Oh yes.
DR. FREUND: And they say that, "Yes, we like the
PAGE 1'9
~~~
~.~_._
. _~--~~-~-~--
~--~---~~-
~~
---~~l
school, but we think it's a State responsibility to support tha~
!
school totally.
I
MELVIN HILL: Well that's this next question, "Should!
1 the provision of Vocational Education Opportunities be made
primarliy a State obligation, or to what extent should it be?"
u
DR. NIX: My feeling is that the majority of the
funding should come from the Federal and State funds as long as
\ we have it. But local systems ought to in some fashion have to
..) put something into it. Really, when you were talking about
1 I Swainsboro, Swainsboro shouldn't have had a Junior College and
,0
L
!; ': a Vocational School together, both. One of them shouldn't have
.
. ' ~ been there. I think everybody now sees that that was simply a
.u. ~~
~:', political move down there to build that Junior College and when:
, ._ ../
we built that area tech school we had students in it. The first I
year or two that college operated,if it hadn't been for the
joint program with the Area Tech School, the college wouldn't
,
:, have had any students ~ You're looking at me kind of funny, but!
'~ you go back and look at your records. I think it was about
a hundred and sixty students there in that college.
DR. MORGAN: I was getting ready to remark they don.lt
n. f, 'h ave too JIlany students now.
DR. NIX: But when you start talking to people around
there that have gotten jobs as a result of having had the opporr
)., ,T
tunity to go to that school, it's a whole lot different.
DR. MULLINS: It's a different story isn't it. I
think the speaker knew what he was doing.
J'AC;r; 20
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Jim, how do you feel about that
question (a) there?
DR. r1ULLINS: State support?
CHAIRMAN THORNHIJ..L: Yeah.
DR. MULLINS: Well I'll throw this out as a possible
problem. If you -- Now I do agree that the State should have
the primary responsibility and it does. And it is exercising
'I that primary responsibility already. To make that statement
Iii in the Constitution look at the possible ramifications here.
,'!
" : You know there's been an argument about can Vocational TechniI):
cal Schools collect tuition. An Attorney General erttered an
/p'V_f]\
'
f.rIf"'-_:" jl),_~~" ',n ': opinion, which was a rather tenuous opinion at best, at which
',,-
i,
-' ;1 he said, "A child up to the age of 19 is to be given a free
, ,e> ani appropriate education in the connnon schools operated by that
lu ~, Board of Education", but the Constitutuion right here as we
Ie
~:
~ are talking is talking about special schools, with defined with~ !'
i ~ in special schools Vocational Trade Schools. Now does that
mean really that Vo-Tech schools are within the connnon school
20 structure whether under the local Board's authority or whether
J; under some other Government authority. Now he never did answer
) that question. In fact in another opinion that he rendered he
indicated that they can or they can't charge tuition. So as a
result he's not clear. But I think the Constitution as written!, 2:; right now, and I always yield to the legal expertise, but it
- - - - , , - - - - , - , ----~-----------
PAGE 21
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -~----,-,-,-,--,-'--'-'-----~
would be my opinion that that wording, if the Courts generally I
1
!
go according to the words, that vocational technical schools
would not be considered to be common schools, but would be
considered to be special schools and thereby if you wanted
, , tuition that's fine and then you wouldn't have to give a free
I, education to that nineteen year old beyond the common school
perimeters of grade twelve. If you put that in Constitutional
language you may be opening ourselves up to a California type
,'.;
I'
situation, where you're getting into the Junior Colleges and if
other kind of post-secondary entrance and look at the "ramifica-
,)
1:
11 .,.~.; tions of increased appropriations for that particular activity.
::' Once we give a child a twelfth grade education, if that child
.-,~,
:;, desires additional education through the technical school they
aTe provided, but he has an obligation in part to his payment
J;:; '~.~) to these schools or to the Junior Colleges or to our other
.:I
I: Q~ four year institutions. So I think that that could be a pro-
-<
~
'~1 blem that you legal people need to think about before you give
blanket kinds of statements as to what the ramifications are
1,1
going to be in the future upon who can get in, what kind of
barriers are we dropping down, what kind of dollars it's going
to cost. We already see what's happening to us in special
education. So I think that we've got to be careful because
,(
there are limitations in available dollars for escalating needs.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Next.
DR. MORGAN: I think my overall impression of what
Pi' GE 22
- -- - - ------ -- -- -- ------1
the Constitution ought to say in the area of education if you
I
I
follow the same structural format we have in the past that i i
there should be a State Board of Education. And I believe there
ought to be a statement as to what its functions ought to be,
broadly, very broadly. And I think we ought to have a second
" Section that says there shall be a Board of Regents. And
broadly these are the functions they ought to have. I, as Jim,!
have some question. The word that scares me is primarily. I
don't have as much problem saying that vocational provision or,
vocational educational opportunities ought to be a state obli-
.'
) ; gation, but what does "primarily" mean. You know, what per-
centage is primarily. Does that mean that local systems who
now contribute money towards Vocational Education will say,
, I, '.You know the Constitution says that's primarily State, so we' 11
1' pull back out of it". Another concern I've got, and this is
I\l ...'_{,l an ambivilant statement because I do believe that the State Cl Board of Education is to be responsible for Vocational Educa-
tion and we ought to say that - and say this is one of your
responsibilities ,but on the other hand it seems to me that as
you get into the specificities of proceeding then you are going'
to start opening yourself up, I think, again in parallel with
what Jim has said. Should it -- What is the State's responsibi~
lity vis a vis special education, or for a liberal arts educa-
tion or for other types of educations. So while I'm in favor
of having a general broad statement about what the Board of
I'r,
23 --, PAGE
- -----,., - --, ,------------ ,-,--------
I
Education should do, which we do not now have. It just says
whatever is in the statutes. I think we have to want a fine
line of how specific we want to be. So I don't think I would
agree with that, just saying that.
DR. NIX: Let me say this, David. I answered the
:-, question for funding.
DR. MORGAN: Yes.
DR. NIX: Now I didn't -- I don't subscribe and if I
'.J left that impression I didn't intend it -- that you ought to
write in the Constitution that, but it ought to be a primary , .,- responsibility of the State to finance it. Now that can be
;.
,.,
'" provided by statute.
DR. MORGAN: Yes, and I don't mean to disagree with
that.
J ~-
DR. FREUND: I tend to agree with the previous speak-i
!
.,: ers that it should not be put into the Constitution. However,
;:
I do feel that the welfare of the people, the productivity of
I, the people, especially looking at how transient people are mov-
l-} ing from place to place, should be an overall state responsibi1ii
ty. It's even a Federal interest that they have said since 191f
I
vocational education affects people allover this country. And
people are that transient and move around and what happens to
people in Alabama affects people in Georgia. and definitely
what happens in Waycross will eventually affect us somehow here,
in Atlanta. So it is mostly a State responsibility so I, while
PACE 24
I agree with the statement, I don't think it's part of the
Constitution.
VICKIE GREENBERG: I'm having a very difficult time
deciding why you have all considered that Vocational Education
should be a State responsibility, while other types of educa-
i)
tion should be primarily a local responsibility. Or have we
decided that yet?
DR. MORGAN: It's not.
()
DR. MULLINS: We haven't addressed that.
;u
DR. NIX: Let me see. Let me pick up on what you
J
7
! I /"-
-:.t'
,:"
are
saying.
The State's already carrying the big end of the
:'
,I stick on funding of all education, public education.
VICKIE GREENBERG: But why should we --
DR. NIX: Isn't the State appropriations of State
15
'" funds for the State Board of Education, to the local systems
J() ~
':: doesn't that exceed about 55 or 60 percent now?
z:
<:
. ~i
;":J.:
':\
DR. MULLINS: Fifty-eight I believe.
18
DR. NIX: At one time we were up to sixty-nine per-
VICKIE GREENBERG: I think it's because they've frozeh i
..'1
that, the required level
DR. NIX: Oh, that. You're all messed up on that,
dear. I mean wide local level is one thing, but the amount
they collect out there though is a lot different.
!.S L__
i
VICKIE G_REE.N__B__E__RG:
I was just thinking why not dis- , ----1
PAGE 25 tinguish between primary and secondary education and postsecondary education as far as funding or as far as responsibili~
! ty, why not say up to grade twelve vocational education shall b~ funded the same as other elementary and secondary programs and after grade twelve it should be the responsibility -- if you want to give the Board of Regents that responsibility. They don't have it right now though.
DR. NIX: No, the Board of Regents don't have it. VICKIE GREENBERG: It says and the Constitution 'Ii only speaks to the University System of Georgia. It doesn't I' ~, speak to DR. NIX: No and let me tell you why. I can preach a long sermon on this. VICKIE GREENBERG: Okay. DR. NIX: I did to Congressman Perkins and Adam Clayton Powell and a bunch of other people up in Washington on numerous occasions in the early sixties. If you will look, if you will just look about the different states and even in our own state to some extent, whenever you get to college trans ,.J fer credit and you get the name of college attached to an institution, then that institution begins to look at how am I going to move from a two year to a four year institution and how am I going to get from a four year to a graduate program and then I want to become a university. With all of those kind of things, they begin to look for people as instructors and pro4
!
fessors with doctors degrees in order to qualify under the
~ accrediting program to move on up, when it doesn't take a per-
son with a doctor's degree to teach auto mechanics or to lay
I brick and block. A higtrchool graduate could probably do just
i l
as well as, excuse me about a person with a doctor's degree, (as i
a person with a doctor's degreet So what you have happening in,
)
an institution called a college is exactly what happened in the
hig~ChOOIS across this country back in the forties and the fifJ
ties, because I was a classroom vocational teacher at the time.
I started teaching in a basement. r1y workshop was in the base-
il ~ ment. And I got whatever was left over. The teacher would sen4
me the slow learners. I had one teacher tell me one time,
,> .'Y'I\ '.';c\It \.-'
~.A- 1 \
"~",n __ "Jack, I'm going to send you Hugh Brown". This is an algebra
L .. ''';=-_ /
teacher. She says, "He can't do a thing with his head", and be~
I
fore I could think I said, "Ms. Warner, if he can't do anything
"
,~
!(,
--'
';
with
his
head,
he
su~e
as
hell
can't
do
much
more
with
his
hands". So that's what happened to occupational education
across this country. The School Administrators, bless their
h' hearts, tried to shift the poor student, the disp1inary students
~ I ' into vocational education. And you can't, you just can't do
the impossible sometimes. Some of these kids you can, because
that's where you can light a fire under them and many of them
can go on and get a college degree and go into other kinds of
profession. But they have to have a reason for learning. Just
;,- because Mrs. Warner would stand up and say, "Hugh, you've got
I'ACE 27
to learn to factor in this Algebra class" .~e'~ ~::;-~'llhat~~~~r1
I Ms. Waters?" You've got to pass". Well, pass, that's a hell
I
I
of a reason to learn something. You don't have to write all of'
this language down over there. You learn something because it
has some meaning for you. Whenever you throw it into a college
and you get the college President wanting to be a college Pres-
II ident of a four year institution then these things out here that ! don't measure up to get him prestige are the things that he's
going to neglect. So you've got to give somebody some responsi~ ,I
bility, and somebody the money to get the job done. And you'
',J
can't say that you've got to have a certain level of Math and
.' English and so forth to get into a lot of these courses. And
,~ some of these courses are not college transfer. But some of
1 1 >~..,. the colleges across the country have made them transfer.
'r""
I
I, ) 'J Cl
i
DR. FREUND: We have an example in an adjoining state~
'..:,:
:
'~I
When .7...,
!7:l
I
was
at
the
University
of
Georgia
in
1970,
Gre.enville
2:
I "I
'x
";1
Tech
in Greenville,
South Carolina was
known
as
one of
the
best
lie, Vo-Tech schools in the South. A couple of years later they
! ; became a technical college. Last year they asked to become a
four year college. They have completely lost their mission.
They got their hands slapped by the State people for wanting to
be a four year college and they are still a technical college
at a two year level. But they have lost the real purpose and
they are not providing for industry wanting to move into that
area and that is another booming area in the Southeast. They
,--_._~
PA(~E 28 .'----,.---.-----" .. _-- ..__.'--'--'1
are not providing the services that are needed down there. We i
i
I
hear a lot of repercussions. It's helping Georgia that they ar~ I
not doing their job, but it's because they've gone completely
'" State operated and wanted to be a college. CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Joe, are we not setting a course:I
h .: toward that same line. I'm thinking of over where I'm from,
I
~ Augusta,the Augusta area. We have Augusta Tech. Our particulat
situation in Columbia County we're getting ready to operate two
'i comprehensi~e hig~.hOOlS. So we've really gone and expanded,
IP Vickie, our secondary program, one through twelve, and really
11 ~ gotten into the vocational end; all the trades, you know, and o """j
!: '_I this sort of thing. But Augusta Tech are beginning to offer
,~. through tying in with Augusta College, you know, associate
OJ,
degrees and this sort of thing. Aren't we tracking down that
same --
. '. L' l..
DR. FREUND: No. I think Georgia has done the wise
l.'
-I
"
::;;
thing
here.
I
That
student
has
the
option of going
to
the
I
colleg~
i
I
l~ but he can still go to Augusta Tech and spend one year there
;,~, and come out being a cracker jack automotive mechanic. They've i
211 got a beautiful .program down there. I just visited with them.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Yes, it does.
DR. FREUND: If they have a joint agreement with the
college he can then go on and get an associates degree in auto-!
motive technology by taking a few additional courses, maybe
some physics courses and general courses and have that associatf
PAGE 29 degree for those people that are most concerned about it. But --1 2 Augusta Tech has not lost their initial mission. You can still!
if ,go in there and without all the college work turn out a cracker .i.
jack mechanic in one year's time. DR. MULLINS: Of course, Robert Ardley, the Territor-
ial Imperrative, would be very instructive of this conversation~ because that's what we're really dealing with is territories. Who's going to control this thing. You know, some of the thing"
i
Joe, and I'm sure you are familiar with this. I serve on a little group that is looking into one of our so-called quote ! i ,) "Community Colleges" and the only way that they feel they could
:';
I' _ go tuition is if a Vo-Tech student decides to take one of the, _, you know, college courses and when they do that they have to
1, , enter as a college student and then pay the tUition. There has, I been the assumption that many of the students who might be in .,'j ~ ,--"
~ ") ? the Vo-Tech school per se might be strongly encouraged to take " some of the college courses that provide, you know, a basis of financial support to that institution as you build up your EFT's, you know, through those particular individuals. So
" there's all kinds of mechanisms to skin the cat, even in a situation where the missions haven't been totally lost. And I agree with Joe that Augusta Tech hasn't lost its Thission, but at the same time there are possibilities for things like this to take place. COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, I'll need to change
PAGE 30
the tape.
DR. NIX: Mr. Chairman, let me say one or two other
3 things along this line. This Fall in the next few weeks if you
1 will watch the newspapers in most of the areas of the State,
really the dalies, you will probably see ads where different
I) colleges are offering courses and tech schools are offering
courses. I would suggest that you look at those 'lists. I've
seen everything in the colleges from physics to teaching people:
to tapdance and play the guitar and all that kind of stuff beint
I
taught at a college. What they are doing studen~s are getting II
: I scarce. They're getting thin 6n the ground so ~ to speak.
they are looking for ways of building up that student number so:
, ''-~--- / ./~I
....., ---_.. /
they can come back to the Legislature and get appropriations.
I: ;; Now I don't mind my tax money going to help some kid that could
<,
1:
just barely get through the twelfth grade or he had to stop to
work about the tenth grade in some little low paying job. I
" don't mind my tax money helping him to get to be Joe, a, good
auto mechanic or an electrician or something like to whe~e he
I
can improve his income. But I sure as heck hate to see my money I
go to support this college student at the colleges spending
'1 their time teaching these little old things that don't mean a
hill of beans about people earning a living. We've got too
many people that need to earn a living that need to be taught
,,
how to earn a living. And to me that's what we set out to do
1< in August of 1960. We let the first contract for the first
___ .
._ _ .__ .
~
.
i - - - - - J
.,:;7:V/f<c,
~,\ \
."~~-t'f-:;;,J ,~\ ;-ry
/
PACE 31
- - -_.._.- - - I ._-.,-~
--~---
Area Tech School in this state and that was in Augusta. The
first one completed was the one in Albany though, Monroe Tech
down there. We called it Ben White, Benjamin White. He was
the director of that thing. We set out with one thing in pur-
pose and that was to take individuals and enroll them in course$
that they had the potential to be successful in and to teach
them ,~hatever knowledg" whatever English they need, whatever
Mathematics they need for that particular occupation. It might
take two weeks, it might take six months to teach those two
subjects to them. But then also have them develop the manipular
tive skills to get a job. Now the HighrChool program helps
people get a job to the extent of an entry level, Joe. I guess
that's the language that's used. An entry level skill, but they
want highly skilled and that's where your Area Tech school comes
in to me. If they graduated from HigHfChoOl and have anentry
level skill, they're not going to go out and make a thousand
dollars a month that first year. But if they can make four or
five hundred dollars a month that first year and let them get
into night school or day school and work at night, whatever
arrangements they want to and keep themselves enrolled, get
enrolled in a Tech School and improve that skill, they're going
to improve their earning capacity. That's the whole reason
for being at the very beginning of the Area Tech School program
and the comprehensive HighfChOOl program that we started in
'66, '69. I think we sometimes -- and I used to argue with my
counterparts across this country in National meetings about thi, business. You can't have an institution that will be sll thing~ to all people. You've got to stand for something in theinstit1l1tion. Now you take an institution that has a good rep and the students getting a job when they finish. You don't have to h worry about that school being successful in the future. It's going to be successful. You get a class of thirty kids coming out of a particular trade area and twenty-five or twenty of them get a job in the area exactly what they were trained maklil ing a good salary and five or six of the othersin a job related occupation. That's the best money you can invest.
DR. FREUND: I think my concept goes a little beyond that. I believe in most of education but especially vocational , education we are spending taxpayer's money not for the benefit
~
.~ of that individual but for the benefit of me, the taxpayer. I
,
~ want to have that person trained not to fix his own car, but so he can fix my car and that there are trained mechanics, that
[. there are trained physicians out there at, from Augusta Medical I" College that if someone wants to go to school for their own ::u enjoyment like macrame or something like that or dancing or i guitar playing, they ought to pay for it. But if it's going to ., be for the benefit for the whole population then the taxpayer
ought to pay for it. We could pass more bond issues if we had more people believe in that I think. Because old people bene" fit from' education by having trained people around.
DR. NIX: This is what I used to tell the local I supertendants. Joe. I said. "The best thing you've got here
in your c~tnty, your best public relations is your Vocational Program, particularly your co-op programs". Because you are sending a student out to work in a person's office and if they do a good job, if you send him a good student, then you've got a real supporter of education. But you better not send him out a sorry one, one that can't spell or punctuate or things of that nature.
DR. FREUND: And he's then paying taxes too if he's 1 i making good money too.
DR. MUlLINS: It's good that you've got all of these
.1
practical thinkers who have been delving in these things for years and this guy here is. you know, the tops. But you know we're dealing with a great number of the variables that ultimate,.;' 1y lead us into this question of governments . That's wh~re we
t.
are moving right now with, I think, most of this conversation. I'm not reaching a conclusion. I'm just saying it's going that 'I way. You take, and I agree with Joe and with Jack, that if )" you've got post-secondary under the Regents you've got problems. You've got some problems if you've got post-secondary under the State Board because each have certain missions that this particu1ar program crosses over and it becomes a difficulty. That doesn't conclude a third board. It doesn't conclude anything else. It does say that there are some difficulties in here.
:'AGE
Take an example. Vern Crawford realizes that he's going to have 'i
, to do something about how they fund higher education; how do i
they get their money for higher education. If you keep going
on the fulltime equivalent student you've got some problems.
So he's looking at program. It makes a lot of sense to look
(.
at program. Because it doesn't cost as much to teach a course
in curriculum and supervision as it does to teach a course in >~ I laser technology. The equipment itself demands higher cost for
one program compared to another. But if you don't have that
kind of mechanism then if education has got all of the students
I,)
2:
~ they've got all of the money in their minds, you see. And thi~
~"1 ..::r:
'~9.\'~\
~: is happening. You've got more people going to the college of
:: !Et~1))r"'.':'" education than you've got going to Georgia Tech. So as a re-
"
./
I
" ~: sult you've got some problems with the funding mechanism here.
(:'
"L'
1; :~ But not only that, the philosophy, if the University System is
.<
"<.'!,
1()
2".,
(-"
therefore
developing
the
academicians
and
the
professional
<
17 ~j
.)n,;
people
who
are
going
to
enter
in
and
provide
for
research
etceti
ra as opposed to being the technician who carries out the re-
!'J
sults of their missions, then they are not going to give as
)'1
much attention. and there's going to be something lost to the
post-secondary movement. But then, as long as we have what we
have got, and that is the reality. we can't talk about what
could necessarily be right now. As what we have, it does say
that there is going to have to be something perhaps a little
bit different or either we must change this whole funding mech-
I'AGE 35
I anism, because the philosophy up top isn't what guides. It's
I the dollars down at the bottom and where they go that determine
what's going to be.
DR. NIX: Let me add something, Jim. Not only the
last statement there, but organization doesn't make success.
People make it successful. So I don't care what you write into
the Constitutional statutes. And I used to tell the State
Board of Education over there, "We can sit over here and pass
all the rules and regulations and policies we want to, but the
tf' guys out there in those local systems are the ones that are
! i .. going to make it work or not work". c.
DR. MULLINS: That's a fact.
,
.\
""1 :11 C "I
';;:"=--_1 / /
DR. NIX: So I think the best thing to do is come up
with what would theoretically would be the best structure and
hopefully that the right people will get into the slots that
are supposed to make it work.
DR. MULLINS: Right.
MELVIN HILL: Well that leads us into our next
question.
qIAIRMAN THORNHILL: Moving right along. Very good,
Mel.
MELVIN HILL: "Should the Constitution provide for
greater centralization and coordination of vocation technical
education programs?" This is governments.
DR. MULLINS: That is governments.
!'ACi' 36
MELVIN HILL: This is what we were leading toward.
So what is the feeling of the panel?
DR. NIX: Well as I read that whoever drafted that
question or submitted something along that line, they are think~
) ing of a third Board.
MELVIN HILL: Not necessarily. No, no, I don't think
you could conclude that the Board would be --
DR. NIX: Oh, are you thinking that the State Board
of Education ought to assume the responsibility for operating
the area Tech?
I
7.
MELVIN HILL: Well that's one option. No, well I
'-- ,wasn't thinking about operation so much. Whether the Constitu-
:;:: tion should in fact express where the primary responsibility for
;J)
1 : vocational education should be. You know clearly. We've
<, 1:
I '~. already discussed it to some extent whether there should be
:.1
,:!' "
some
jurisdiction
or
what.
,J.
DR. NIX: I think it ought to be with the State Board;
of Education.
MELVIN HILL: With the State Board.
DR. MULLINS: Well I answered that question, "Yes".
I didn't designate which, you know, method. In fact we've got
a little report here I'll leave in your hands that indicates
seven alternatives that comes anything from the controversial
of third boards down to combinations of things, that, you know,
are some bit meaningless. But, yes, I definitely think there's
PAC;E 37
going to have to be some shared governments though.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: David.
MR. MORGAN: I don't believe that -- of course, it 'I would depend on how you phrased it. I'm not quite sure what you:
would have in mind to indicate that greater centralization is
needed. I agree with Mel. I think we have talked before whe-
ther you should mention vocational education in the responsibi-
lity in the State Board of Education. Now I agree with that,
but I don't know whether less or more centralization is needed.
IU
In other words you are prescribing what sort of -- In the
t')
1: ~ Constitution, you know, the way I read the question you could
,U
, . ) 'Y.
,...~l!{<'1'
',. possibly be saying that we need to set up an organizational
( "1\,\ (~,
r-<!'!!','" '.'
~., '".=~/:: framework. I don't believe that should be in the Constitution.'
. / " ,
-
! .J
DR. FREUND: I don't believe it should be in the
'J Constitution to have a specific organizational framework similat
:>
;
'n
iI' Z
~ to the reasoning I gave in the answer to "the first question
0')
",:)..
I, "1' that changes can be rapid and we can't even imagine what the
.~
;,',
changes will be and that could put us into a restricting sit-
uation which may nQt ~llow for good operation. In looking at
this the State Board of Education and the Board of Regents have
a fairly good working relationship and a means of coordination,
a sharing of facilities and a number of things. We have an
even larger threat to the waste of money and that's the CETA
Programs that are run without any coordination or by a junior
college that does not report to the Board of Education or the
Pl\(II.': 38
Board of Regents that they can go run, have or construct prog-
) i rams any place they want right next to our programs and dupli-
cate efforts.
DR. NIX: That goes back to '62 when Kennedy got ARA
~ through the Redevelopment Act and started those programs back
{ then, Joe, then MDTA and now CETA, you know. I kept trying to
tell them, "You know you've already got the framework in the
States " ,you know. 'If they'd just a funneled it in the right
manner, that money could have gone a lot further than What it's
gone.
,
DR. FREUND: Now they're setting up dual school
Q :>.
~
,4.'fyY!i..4 . .;, systems --Systems for training of people within the schools
/? .. \\.
~.
I\ I,,\,,1,1":.__..')j')If co,'.'"''',
0
.J
and
adjoining
the
schools
and
after
the
schools
run
by
the
\ ' ,...... ~
,1/1,./
<..")
,. Department of Labor.
~'
.:
1.
VICKIE GREENBERG: These are under the CETA Program?
'J
':">
1( ~
DR. FREUND: Yes, and part of the problem they say
.~
c!
7.
)1 &; is that education is not responsive so they set up a new system,
I
DR. MULLINS: That's what you call lobbying Washingto~
to get it changed.
DR. FREUND: Instead of working with the system they
abandoned the system.
..,"!
DR. NIX: No, I'll tell you why that came about. Be-
cause we've had stronger Secretaries of Labor in Washington for '", the last fifteen years than we've had Secretaries of HEW, that' ~
exactly why. We had some in the 60's, in the early 60's in
39
particular, we had some weak HEW Secretaries and some strong,
you know, Goldberg in the Labor Department, you know, Secretary
of Labor. He was strong. He's the guy that got all this stuff
started about CETA and that philosophy; education is not doing
it so we've got to give it to Labor, they know what to do with
it.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Well this new Department of Educa-
tion, do you think this'll change it?
DR. NIX: No, because it's not going to be a very
strong department.
!;
DR. MULLINS: I don't think so. No. I believe the
12 " Republican platform on that .
.'
DR. FREUND: The way it was originally conceived but
I,,;: then the politics got involved and much of their program
strength that was supposed to be in the Department of Education
.'i
1(i has been pulled out and given to the Department of Agriculture,
the Department of the Interior, the Department of Labor. Every~
one's running the education program.
,,/
VICKIE GREENBERG: But even
DR. MULLINS: Even wit~in education we have the
emergency Schooi Aid Act where you have the NPO's. You know
this is basically the same thing that they are doing and you
are finding that more is going in these areas than would be
going into the actual school situation.
VICKIE GREENBERG: But in Georgia education is also
PAGE 40
under the Department of Human Resources, right?
DR. MULLINS: What?
VICKIE GREENBERG: The Department of Human Resources.
DR. MULLINS: What about it?
DR. NIX: They have an educational program, special
education.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Aren't they also running special
schools?
DR. FREUND: And the Department of Corrections.
i'j
MS. COOK: They are training centers.
DR. FREUND: And the Department of Labor.
-'
DR. NIX: See the Congress is writing a lot of these
vo1ved.
1S .."1
DR. MULLINS: Section twenty and that type of thing.
,,'l
':",
~ () .~
DR. NIX: Build up more beurocracy. And that causes
u
C,
-i.:
~" the poor teacher out there then to have to fill out forms for
:~ all the different categories of people, you know, and they
19 don't have time to teach little Johnny.
DR. MULLINS: Governor Busby will find that out
21 though.
MEL HILL: We can't address that problem until we
rewrite the Federal Constitution.
DR. MULLINS: We'vegot all the Constitution --
DR. NIX: Well we can elect some more Congressman
PAGE 41
and Senators. Tying in with this one, Mr. Chairman, about
centeralization under Item (c) there. I think you already have
provisions for contractural arrangements between the Regents
and the State Board of Education. I don't much believe you
need anything in the Constitution because the statutes can take!
'J care of that.
DR. MULLINS: Well if we're going to (c) on that,
you know it does say, "encourage cooperation", and I think I
said in one other meeting when the same question came up that
],1 "encourage cooperation" has no meaning. Basically as much mean-
.-.,
ing as agreements has. Because agreements can be made and can
"
~
f'" :< be broken without any recourse in law. Because agreement is
c-
'.'.J
u
just an agreement.
We've found that between DHR and the Depart~
,. ment of Education. It hasn't existed yet between Regents and
"
1-;~: Board to my knowledge but it very well could. Once Joe works
with his counterparts in the Chancellor's office and they come
<
';i up with one of these cotmlunity college type set-ups. who then
is the controlling factor, after the money is put in. Who's
, property is it on. Who's administration is it under. Then
what obligations -- What if Joe then decides with his other
counterparts in the Department that, "Okay. we've done all of
this, but we now see the need for a new direction. So where-
as we started that and we've been supporting it with our fair
share up until this time. We're going elsewhere". What's
,
going to prevent their doing that, you see?
DR. NIX: Jim, excuse me for interrupting you on
this thing, but --
DR. MULLINS: Yeah.
DR. NIX: I think the agreement, once Joe and his
counterparts work it uP. as I envision the thing, and I guess (; Charlie Mack does the same thing. I have Joe sign off on it
7I
and he'd bring it to me and my Board would approve it, the
State Board, this agreement and Crawford would do the same
thing with the Regents and once the two Boards signed off on
it and approved it, it would be an official part of their min- ,
'-z"
II ~ utes that they've approving it. Now the contract ought to
~
:"' ':..
~"'41\ ". ~ specify who's going to finance cons truction and wh::>' s going
;"LJ))r'!"!.''o ,~ to finance the equipment and who's going to hire the teachers ';
]},
,n and so on down the line. So I don't see that Joe could just
'( :1"
IS ~ all of a sudden back out of it . .,
i (- f~
~,
,:)
z. <
DR. MULLINS: Oh, no, no.
DR. NIX: Because it would embarress his Board, his
Supertendant.
,)
DR. MULLINS: Oh, no. no. I wasn't saying that. I
was just using the example of the, "what if"? and the"what if"
still applies. Yes, it is true that when they do these things
it's said that the Department is going to put up so much money
for capital outlay, so much money for equipment, the college is
going to put up so much money for grounds and administration and
personnel and so much for equipment and M & 0 cost and such.
rr-----------
PAGE 43
Ii
i
i
!i So that's very definitively determined. Then they come over I
~
IiiI
Ii
across
the
street
to
Budget and
they
ask for money
to
,I
carry outi
Ii
; :1
I this agreement. All right, General Assembly gives them the
!
i money and they carry it out. Now there's got to be something
that continues after that. Then it becomes part of a continua-'
tion funding item, thus
DR. NIX: And thus a part of their budget.
DR. MULLINS: -- yeah, but if you don't ask for that
.I
9 in your continuation funding, you need to redirect those dollar~
~ into other priority needs into either of the two categories,
7:
1] ~
",') I don't think that there would be anything binding that would
"-,-
l""1 r:
j - .' hold you into that in the future.
DR. NI}{: No, but I tell if I wa~ in Charlie's place
I /~ ,)-- and Crawford didn't have it in his budget request,I'd let the
,-
15 ,"~
",
;::t'
General
Assembly know
it when
I
got
before
them
for
my
budget
-'
1I,
."~.',
"
and
I
bet
you
Crawford would
let
them know
that
I
hadn't
asked
<,--
!I
,,"' if)
for
it in my budget
too,
if I
was
DR. FREUND: Crawford's budget you can't tell.
DR. MULLINS: That's right.
DR. NIX: I know, but if you asked for it from the
General Assembly and it's your budget and it's line item, be-
cause you have more of line item budget than any of the Depart-
ments of State Government, it's a line item in your budget,
appropriation in your budget and then you put it up and they
don't fulfill their end of the stick, then it comes back to thei
4 4 'j-. ' A . (l"'.}.~' room downstairs, the appropriations room and the Legislature
will make the decision then as to whether the Regents are going
to live up to it or they're not going to live up to it.
DR. FREUND: That' would be a quick way for them to
get line items.
DR. NIX: It sure would.
DR. MORGAN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to speak in favor
of (c). It may be because I think I'm partially responsible
'} for it being in there. So I may be the only one speaking for
:u it. My memory serves me, and it's only very limi ted memory,
and there are others, especially Dr. Nix would have better
o
J' " recollections. In the recent past it has been my experience u ". that often the Board of Education and the Board of Regents have
seen their responsibilities in the Constitution or in the sta-
<
15 ,~ tutes and have narrowly seen them and have sometimes refrained
o
C<
~ !ll' from taking the initiative to seek out the other Board to work o." T
17 ~ together on a project, saying, "Well that's not our responsibi-
lity to do that, that's theirs and let them worry about it".
i. I .)
In the two cases that I can think of where the two Boards have
~;) I actively worked together, one on the joint agreements betw~en
21 Vocational Technical Schools and Colleges, I believe there was
,~ per -- that case and also the case of the recent establishment
.:.: of the liaison committee between the two Boards -- that these
:.1 were two events that were triggered by Governors that were in
.~s some cases forced by Governors saying, "We're going to have
PAGE 45
these types of schools working together", and in the other
case saying, "We want these two Boards that have worked in the
past previously on the liaison committee, but that committee
is now defunct and I'd like to get it started again", and it
happened in the basement of this building. So I agree with
, Jim that it would not have any power to make them do something,
but I think it would speak to them, saying, "You should be
working with the other Board actively and it shpuld not take a
:, Governor to step in and make you do it". I have something in
i'.l mind on the order of, after mentioning the two boards and their,
,"
z
I
1t ,".- responsibilities, saying that these two Boards shall work to-
.J gether to enhance educational opportunities of the state citi-
zens. And in my comments I do not mean to say, and I think Dr.
;: Nix understands, that I'm criticising his administration at all, ,<'
but, and I'd like for him to correct me on any of that.
J (I L~I
,.U
DR. NIX: Well in the Spring of 1966 Mr. Peters and
"
~ -I
"' Bob l-Jright, Chairman and Vice Chairman of the State Board of
Education told me to go see Chancellor Simpson to see if we
could get us a program started. I don't know whether you
found that in your study or not, but anyway Jimmy Dunlap from
Gainesville was Chairman of the Board of Regents at the time
and John Langdale down at Valdosta was vice Chairman and we
used to meet at the old Athletic Club. Some of you people
from out of state and new people around here don't even know
where that thing is. It's gone now. But we used to meet over
PAGE 46 I and we'd have dinner and talk about, you know, what problems 2 we were having and we did that once a quarter. We kept that up
for about two years I guess ~d then it just kind of dwindled away and we didn't keep going. I really don't know what caused us to drop out but anyway out of all of that came this basic 1\ two year program at the colleges. We were concerned at that time about getting enough teachers. They were just not turning ~ them out and we didn't like the idea of having to give provision, al certificates in the Fall and just get any good housewife> \0 you know, to come in and teach and as a substitute too, you
',:)
it L know,sometimes clear on up to Christmas. You remember that don't you. It was tough staffing the schools. So we talked to them. Fred Davidson was Vice Chancellor at the time. We talked to them about coming up with something where if they
<,
:r: came from a Junior College, they would have already been intro-' duced to the field of education. And I think all of the Junior i Colleges now offer at least one course in education or they used to. Do they still do it? DR. MULLINS: I'm not sure. DR. NIX: I think they have one that they offer and it's a -- the same is supposed to be the same thing allover the system. It's just an introduction to education, the profession, teaching, public education and so forth. Hopefully trying to alert some of them at an early stage, you know, that they would: select teaching then as their major then at the senior colleges~
PAGE 47
We started out doing some of those things, but then the Univers~
ity system started growing by leaps and bounds and they could
,
keep their head above water and to house the students that they!
were getting. But I suspect now with the student population
in the colleges across the country dimenishing. There are ways
'j that would get their attention, you know, to get more students.
MELVIN HILL: Dr. Freund, let me ask you something.
Do you think a statement in the Constitution that would speci-
fically authorize the State Board and the Board of Regents to
1) contract with one another for the provision of vocational educa-
I,
..c' ~
tional services would be either necessary or recommended?
That
."
'1
'.~ ;.J
would do what
David would
like
to
do,
I' think.
is mention it
and would specifically authorize it. Is there any worry that
": I' " contracting between these two bodies might not be authorized
~
r
I'; :j and therefore it's subject to challenge at some point? And if
c, we included a specific authorization for enter contracting be-
,..
.oj tween those two Boards for this purpose that that would solve
j ~:
any potential problems?
DR. MORGAN: I'd like to respond. I don't think it
would solve my problem particularly because you are speaking
of just vocational education and it seems to me there are a
number of other areas the State Board and the Board of Regents
can and often work together on; teacher preparation perhaps.
.,'.-1
So I -- I
DR. MULLINS: We will separate that.
DR. MORGAN: That's another issue. I personally
wouldn't be in favor of restricting it, Mel, to just vocational;
DR. FREUND: The Board of Education contracts now
with the Board of Regents for the provision many services. We
do it for staff development, research, working development.
We're talking about hundreds of thousands of millions of dol-
lars.
DR. NIX: Yeah, we use a million or two dollars every!
year, teacher training contracts, vocational benefits.
10
u
1~
_.
,...~
:..1.
allowed.
DR. MULLINS: Yeah, that's already, like you say, DR. FREUND: There's other parts of the Department of
Education that also has many contracts for test development,
validation of instruments, --
1~
'.'/
DR. MORGAN: Television.
~
;<)
:.;1
7
'"
DR. FREUND: Television, yeah. So I don't know I'm
/.
l~
",;'
" not
a
Constitutional
lawyer
and
know
if
it's
necessary.
If it'~
not in the Constitution we can't do it?
,q
MELVIN HILL: Well there's a broad governmental con-
tracting provision in Article Nine that would probably cover
your situation. I don't personally feel it's necessary, but if
it were added it would at least indicate the desirability of
a contract between the two Boards. But I don't know. It's
being done already and the authority is there already. Perhaps:
you should be silent.
PAGE 49
DR. FREUND: Right. Maybe it's not necessary.
MELVIN HILL: Yes.
DR. FREUND: Guard against restrictions. You know
f we've got so many restrictions that you can't do anything in
most situations or you can't do something because of ten re-
strictions. Then you have to have a form printed. And you
can't get a form printed until twenty people approve it and
'< then you have to get it through the budget and another twenty
people approve it and by that time it's not needed anymore.
{\
; DR~ MULLINS: The Constitution, if you want to deal
- with the Constitution, I would guess. where you are going to
have to have authority given where it can't be accomplished at
this particular time and if you've got two Constitutional bodie$,
I -~ State Board and Board of Regents,and they are now both in the
~, business of vocational technical education, which comes under
::J
. the category of post-secondary education, and if there are dif-
.~ ficul ties in duplication, if there are difficulties in not being
able to relate to say other kinds of facilities because of pre-
l} I sent attitudes so that we have duplication not just of personne]
2t, or of programs, but of facility alike. Then something needs to
be done to empower somebody to make some kind decision after
these things may have already been put in place. Now if it's
before~and, you can do something, but once it's built and under
the power of a Constitutional authority they govern how it's
going to be used and who is going to have access to it. It's
:'ACE 50 i
not according to, you know, how the thing was developed. Now
'1
that leaves us, I think, we've got (c) and (d), which are reallt not that different except one is just making sort of a sugges- : tion to encourage and the other one is just saying do you do it~ On that one I still say that if we're going to envision this thing that Governor Busby insists upon happening, and that being that the Regents and the Board will meet and do their legislative, I mean their discussions and their liaison meetings, I you could. And that is an alternative. I'm not suggesting that this be it because if I had, I would be just the opposite of Jack. I would go for a third Board if I had my druthers, but and include the kind of people necessary to make the kind
\
of long range kind of decisions and plans that Joe talks about ., as the changing state of technology comes upon us. But we're , not going to get there. That's not very realistic. There is
resistance from that within the House, the Senate, the Governor.. the leaders in every division. So I don't even think that's worth the discussion. But on the other side there are some alternatives that might be a little more appealing and I'm not saying that what I am going to say is appealing at all. I say .. 1 as an example. If you have a liaison empower them. Don't encourage them. Empower them to make decisions. Have an equal
,'3
number, three from the Board, three from the Regents. Let them make decisions relative to vocational technical education" not from an advisory standpoint but from a plenary mandatory
PAGE 51
decision point of view and that would be impinged back upon
i
.I
both Boards. But they would be coming from both of those Board,
with their entire staff's advice as to what might need be done
on the issues to agenda. In that manner you might be able to
overcome many of the kinds of problems that seemingly are with
us now and perhaps we are going to have in the future. I do
think personally that we are going to need some mechanism and
only the Constitution can address that mechanism because of the:
two Constitutional authorities that can't abridge one another.
DR. NIX: But, Jim, you have a Governor and you have
I! ... a Legislature. And if you have two Constitutional Boards and
~ "I
:!~
/~;9\U~ ' . both of them have to face the Legislature for funds, both
~(~6~))r"""" " Boards, I think there's some question as to whether or not you -,- . -.-,/ ~
could let say three members obligate all ten of them or all fif~
teen of them. If you're going to try to give them power to act
and bind the rest of the members of the Board, I think you're
getting on something a little dangerous there. The other thing
is the Governor nominates and the Senate confirms the members
on both these Boards. Now if they would do more than select
someone because of who he voted for and who she voted for or th~
person. I think that' the way. If they would select a person
on the basi's of that person's ability to think and to do what's
right, then the Senate, when they have a hearing for the con-
firmation should let them know that they expect this to take
place. Now having said that, it is a simple thing for the Gov-
PAGE 52
ernor to have the administration legislation introduced and if
he did I am sure in an area like this the Legislature would
pass it almost unanimously and without saying by statute that
they would have to work together, which I think would perhaps
get at what you are talking about.
DR. MULLINS: I think it would fall in the face of
Constitutionality though. A statute can't abridge the Consti-
, tution.
DR. NIX: Yeah, but the Legislature can pass a sta-
" tute saying that the State Board of Education and the State
! J Board of Regents should meet periodically or that connnittees r:-, of the two should meet periodically and submit annual reports
to the General Assembly and to the Governor as to what they
met and what, you know, they did.
DR. MULLINS: Well they could resolute them, but I
:) ,~ don't think they could statute them.
{;)
VICKIE GREENBERG: We could put a broad provision in
the Constitution under the Preamble saying the educational
system of Georgia shall be managed by the State Board of Educa-
Jj tion and the State Board of Regents or any combination thereof,
" would that --
DR. MULLINS: I believe Jack might fight that one,
wouldn't you?
'1
DR. NIX: No. Oh, Lord yes. You're going to mess up
.'S everything with that.
_ _ _--- -----_.-._,--- .. ..
.. ~---_._._--
.. ---._~-~----~---------
_~--_._--~-----_.-._--_._._~
PAGE 53
VICKIE GREENBERG: Okay, wait. The Board of Regents
only gets involved in issues of the State Board or issues of
!: vocational education when it comes to sharing facilities, right
DR. FREUND: No.
VICKIE GREENBERG: There's others?
DR. FREUND: They run some of their own programs.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Why sh -- that's the question,
why should the Board of Regents really
",
DR. MULLINS: Dollars.
l(j
VICKIE GREENBERG: Pardon?
(~
DR. MULLINS: Dollars.
,,,::.
1" ':"r:
DR. FREUND: In their Community Colleges they run --
VICKIE GREENBERG: They run the program. But it's
" '>- also because of the physical structure isn't it?
I',
,~)
DR. FREUND: Well they have licensed practical nursin,
i~
: l)
,z~"
1",1
and we
have
licensed
practical
nursing.
They have dental hy-
(:1
L
,")~. giene, no we don't have dental hygiene programs yet. But they
have those kinds of associate degree programs that you can get
)'! an associate degree to or you don't need to, courses in busines$
office, education. We are accused of duplicating efforts in 2J Albany at Albany Junior College. They have a rather large
business education program with typewriters where people sit , ., down and learn how to be secretaries and typist. They can also
go over to the Area Vo-Tech school. We have typewriters and
they can sit down and learn how to be secretaries there. Un-
Ii
I
54
fortunately in that situation neither facility is so larg,e thd,C
we are having unneccessary duplication of effort, but the
possibility does exist that both institutions in Swainesboro
could have too many preparation of too many secretaries or too
big a lab space with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of
I, equipment and over at the Vo-Tech School have the very same
thing. They can duplicate. So there does nt;;cJ to be some
kind of coordination or the taxpayer's money can be wasted.
'I As a matter of fact we think Swainesboro Junior College is going
HI to start a marketing program and we have a marketing program
at Swainesboro Tech.
; l ..
I
~. j
DR. NIX: Well is that that's for survival though.
DR. FREtmD; Un hunh. So there is a possibility there
i~ that in the future the taxpayer's money can be wasted unless
l:~~. there is some coordination. Now through the Liaison Committee
we thought we had a way of resolving this and the staff develop-
ed a system where we would start out at the local level and re-
quire local people to get together where there is a Junior Col-
lege and aVo-Tech syatem in close proximity and are serving
basically the same service area.and that any new program they
wOuld have to aSree on, who was going to operate that pror,ram.
It would then come to the L1aiaon Comnittee, three members of
each, and that only if it was approved by the Liaison Committee
would it go to the respective Board dor approval. Now the State
Board of Education approved that. The Board of Regents would
- .. .. .._-,----- ,.------... .. "-~--_ ~------.- ._._~-_._
_----~._~-_
_
..
PAGE 55
- - - - - - - - , . _ - - - - - - - - - ; ---"~-~----"'-
.
not approve that. They said that is usurping their authority i
1
to operate any program when and where they want to.
DR. MORGAN: Well let me add to that. That's just
the two public sectors of post-secondary education trying but
failing in a sense to get together. That leaves out our pri-
vate colleges in the State and our profit making schools we
know as propietary, such as Massey Bussiness College.
DR. NIX: Yeah, but we ought not mess up with those
-- No, sir. Don't put anything in the Constitution that's
going to get the State Board of Education and the State Board
,c.'
1\ ;: of Regents into the business of private education.
...()
0.
,,
)' ~
DR. MORGAN: No, I didn't. I just meant to point outl
i
i
that even with those two working together they were just talkin~
i
11 ,~ about duplicating among themselves. They didn't have to take i
"J:
,~,
into
account
what
private
institutions
were
offering
in
the
e,
lJ ~: area that may have further duplicated effort.
(.)
DR. NIX: Now your talking about this business of
I
i' coordination, the Regents didn't do such a good job of coordinat
i
ting thems elves. lfuat they did in Savannah. They bui1t two
colleges. They did the same thing down in Albany even after
..:1 the racial business was already before us and all they built
",) that second college in Albany.
,,
~\
DR. FREUND: And they talked about building one in
Athens.
DR. NIX: Yeah, I know it. I don't mean to be criti-
PAlr1'; 56
1-,-----
--~-.-.. --.------.-- - ' ,
cal of the Board of Regents, but they've just got an awful lot I
of money in the last decade or two that I think could have been
~ used part of it for public education.
DR. MULLINS: Well I really appreciate some support
for my view because what you're saying is you can't trust
h either one of them. You've got to put them together, you see.
MELVIN HILL: Joe, do you think that anything should 1
be added to the Constitution to try to address the problem you '
() face- or it's not appropriate1
10
DR. FREUND: We did reach a compromise on that and
) J ~: that is that all applications will go to the Board with the
,.~)
:; f i\~li,/-- "....'7'.V. ~b.~(j
'. ~;L."'-._>f
1.'
e'"""'D
'"
.c.J.:
Si
recommendation from the now is cause each Board
Liaison to jump
Conunittee and what it will do through two more complete sets
- './'
.i
14 ~ of hoops before a new program is implemented at a time of de-
r
15 :, creasing enrollment -- not in the Vo-Tech Schools their enCO ;:.:
C>
16 ~a rollments continue to increase, but the availability of people 7 .;,
l" .~ in that age bracket is decreasing. I think all State agencies
18 need to jump through a few more hoops before we start new pro-
l'-J i grams.
MELVIN HILL: So in other words you've worked out
I
i
[
21 the problem basically under the present system and so you don't,
2' see a change necessary?
23
DR. FREUND: I have no reason to believe that it will'
I
I
not work. But I don't know that.
i
VICKIE GREENBERG: So there would be no more duplica-iI
!
PAGE 57
I: tion of services and there will be a clear delineation of authority between the Board of Regents, the State Board of Edu-
, cation and all their programs1
. DR. NIX: He didn't say that.
DR. FREUND: As long as honorable people work togethet.
DR. NIX: Now that's it.
DR. FREUND: That will work.
...
u
DR. MULLINS: You see that's the whoLe thing about
9 it. When you set up an organizational structure, you can't
III think about the good people that you 'have in office now. They
7
II TI may not be there later. Some other kind dastardly person may
."
1) ;~ come in and cause all kind of havoc.
C,,,T,,,,.r..
.'
DR. FREUND: Yeah, but you can't legislate against
.1 >- every dastardly deed.
I.) ~)
~."
DR. MULLINS. No.
i: ~:
DR. FREUND: They'll think up new ones.
c-..,.
l ; :.t.
DR. MULLINS: Basically the .observable ones.
." '
DR. NIX: Anymore than a~l ministers preach everybody:
into heaven, you can't do that. DR. FREUND: But I would caution you against getting
too specific where you do not have the possibility of changing I
with the times. If you have a new Constitution and it gets approved by the general population., we're going to be stuck with it for twenty-five years and what this world's going to
look like in the year 2005 none of us has the vision of seeing.
P1 GE 58
-----',
DR. NIX: Specificity ought to be limited.
I
,I
2
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Authority through Constitution
and regulated through statutory provisions
"
4
DR. NIX: Right.
,
5
MELVIN HILL: Do you think the Board of Regents would!
Ii I I
(, object to a provision that we were talking about earlier to
vest in the Board of Education responsibility for vocational
education programs?
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: They shouldn't.
DR. FREUND: Yes, I think they would.
,,
~ ~ ...,.
MELVIN' HILL: Because it would impinge on what they
>:
C
"-
I ~ ~; see to be their --
~.'9XI1.ti"
"
. i\("'~\-~__":~'l)/\'i.I r-~'"'''"
C
is
9-
DR. FREUND:
It's a very minor part of their program
1 i ~: now, maybe 2%, but I expect that they anticipate it will inv; < I:
IS ~ crease and there is whe~e, if it does increase tremendously,
''.-x""
j(, :~ this is where we have the possibility of duplication of effort. ::>
I' :;
MELVIN HILL: Well did you and David respond to (d),
18 question (d)?
19 ,I
DR. MORGAN: My information, Joe, is that they are
,;0 on considerably more than 2%, especially in the Junior Collegesi,.
~
2J In some cases it approaches 50% of what I would call occupation~ I
71 al programs. So I
DR. NIX: But not joint enrollment.
DR. MORGAN: No,sir, not joint enrollment. So what
I was saying was, "Yes", I agree with Joe. I think they would
PAGE 59
object unless you define vocational to only mean things that ': are funded by Federal funds or something like that, which is
currently the only way they'd have, but in other words if it
appears that you are giving to the State Board of Education the I responsibility for everything in the State that is occupational~
ly oriented, no they wouldn't go along with that. Because many
(,
of their programs, as Joe has pointed out, are and it's increas~
ing that way.
')
DR. FREUND: I know how one state solved that and it
was by statute that all programs that require an associate
\.')
li ~ degree would be the responsibility of the Board of Regents, like
-1:
.~,; the medical lab technician in two years will require an associaie
, degree for accreditation. And so, then that would be their
'J v,
" .: responsibility. All programs that do not require an associate
L,~' degree would be considered vocational education and would then
I" '~be under the auspices of the State Board of Education by direct 'I"
)! :~ operation or by agreement. That is how one state solved it and I
they hassled this about three years ago. And I was in that
II' . state at the time.
DR. NIX: It kind of makes sense.
CHAIRMAN nIORNHILL: Mel, Dr.Nix is going to have to
), leave very shortly, could we go on and get into the next Sectio~,
'; Dealing with Exceptional Children and let him go on and give hi$
". responses and then we can excuse him.
DR. NIX: If you don't mind, Mr. Chairman, let me just
PAGE 60
--.- -"~. -----,
tell you how I feel about each one of these things and then I'l~
1
leave and y'all can chew me up anyway you want to.
.1 I
MELVIN HILL: And anything else you want to respond
'\ to.
DR. MULLINS: Jack, you better respond to that (e)
too. You know, we never got to it.
7
DR. NIX: (e)?
DR. MULLINS: You know, on the "Should the Constitu-
tI I tion authorize the State Board of Education to contract with
:0 private educational institutions for vocational training?"
",-
DR. NIX: I don't have an (e) on mine.
MELVIN HILL: Oh, here you go.
DR. NIX: Oh, "Should the Constitution authorize th'e
1.4
~..., ;;,
State
Board
of
Education
to
contract with
private
educational
-<t;
] 5 ,~ institutions for vocational training?" ,0
!~:
::-'
..r;,;;
6]
.~
'
:'1
MELVIN HILL: This came out a Attorney General's
l
opinion. 1-,
<' 'L
".{)
1"
DR. NIX: Okay. I would say that under that particu-
i,) I lar -- and ,David, you'll be a little surprised --
DR. MORGAN: I'm listening, go ahead.
DR. NIX:
only if the private institution would
subject itself to minimum standards that the State Board of
Education requires its 9wn institutions to meet. Do you see
what I'm talking about, Joe?
DR. FREUND: Un hunh.
PAGE 61
------- -_.. __._-- - - - - - - - ,
DR. NIX: In othdr words there're a lot of fly by night
private schools and sOme place in this ,thing, in the Consti>tu-' II
.i,l
tion you ought to make it possible because the Legislature,
.t they haven't had the grit to bite the bullett on it in the
past because we drafted legislation in '67 and'68 to give the
" State Board of Education the authority to set minimum standards
for elementary and highfCh001S and vocational schools. We've
only got just a smattering of legislation through on it. We
l\ got absolutely nothing on it in elementary and secondary. So
the State Board of Education they can't set any minimum unless
':. '7
:' they've past it since I left down there. You can go out and
~
", start a school and hire anyone you want to to teach school.
1...
e'
I. w
'.'
And
no
one
can
say
anything
to
you
about
it.
There are many
.'.,.-, kids across this state that are being shortchanged because of
1-
15 ) that, both black and white. It was tough in the late sixties ~j r~ ~
and early seventies at the kids that were being shortchanged,
.:-
1 J.
: 7 ,. it really was. It's not so bad now. But I would say only
the Constitution -- I don't know that the Constitution ought
to even address private education. I think that can be in a
statute.
DR. MORGAN: In the Attorney General's opinion on
.- that and I've just looked at it. It's 67-29 by the way. It
seems that he's keying his objection to doing that based on
State statute on code.
MELVIN HILL: That's right.
__. ~
.~
..__~.
---J
PACE 62
DR. MORGAN: So if that is the case then that could
DR. NIX: Yes, I think tha t can be handled by s ta tu te;.
DR. MULLINS: Yeah, that's what my statement was.
DR. NIX: Okay. Let me, if you don't mind, Mr. Chair~
f) man, get number two, three and four right quick here.
"Should the Constitution contain any special provi-
" sions for schools for exceptional children?" Only to the. i iI
4 extent that the State Board of Education would be authorized
lu to establish the special schools that would not necessitate
1. ~: every system having one of those kinds of schools. For instance: :,.' ',' a deaf school or a blind school, every system can't operate u
one. You can't have that in Columbia County. But someplace
in the State the State Board ought to have the authority, if
. :;
15
<'~
Col:
we
have
special
people,
and
there's
always
a
small
number of
:oJ
ib
{
'c,",
them,
then
I
think
the State Board ought
to
have
the
authority
1
J
,:x;
"
to
establish a
special
school
for
unusual
individuals.
Rut now;
!."' if a local system can possibly do it the local system ought to
19 do it, not the state. I believe very strongly in local con-
trol.
21
(a) under that, "Should the provision of educational
opportunities for exceptional children be made primarily a
.".."" State obligation?" I'd say only as a part of the total funding
24 program. They might set up by formulae a different way of dis-
:' tributing the money to a local system. For instance if a child
PAGE 63 ! i,--~~-~~cep tional o;ha~iica;p-~d--~-;-~om~~~-y~~~-~;~~-~uld-~~ve-;h~-l
more dollars per child for instance. But that can be done by
statute or by appropriation or by State Board policy. I don't
know that you'd have to write it in the Constitution. "Should the responsibility of the State to provide
educational oppor,tunities for the handi,capped be specified?" Here again I'd say only as a part of the total re-
s sponsibility for all citizens. And I think that the State
'J Board should have the responsibility to provide public educatiolt
I
::, without discrimination agewise, colorwise, sexwise or anything'
else
..
c.r:
"Should the Constitution", Item 3, "contain any
special provisions for schools for adult education?"
I'm not quite sure. I think now Adult Education is by statute. I don't think it's mentioned in the Constitution ii- at all.
MELVIN HILL: Well it's one of the special schools that can be created by referendum locally by local legislation subject to a referendum. These three kinds of schools are
lumped together, the Vocational Trade Schools, the Schools for
Exceptional Children, and the Schools for Adult Education. All three of those are considered special schools which can be
created by local legislation subject to referendum and the question was whether there should continue to be a special provision to that effect in here or should it just be left
PAc;\"; 64
to statute and left to Board po1icy.in order to determine
DR. NIX: Well let me say this. Local Boards of
Education ought to have the authority to establish schools
for adults that for some reason or another did not complete an elementary school education or a hig~Ch001 education and/or
an occupational program regardless of their age because some of
the happiest people you run into are people with forty or fifty
years of age and all of a sudden they get a highfchool diploma i
from actually attending school. And I think that is just
marvelous and we ought not do anything that would prohibit somet
'I
thing like that. Okay.
Item Number 4, no I don't think that ought to be
L retained in the Constitution because that relates to these
four, five, six schools, Joe, and that's what that's referring
-
1,) to is like Lanier Tech. I think they ought to be turned over
~ to local Boards of Education
.'
7
Now could I comment on just two or three items
that I've mentioned here in the margin. In Section V under
i Local Systems, paragraph 1, we just didn't have the power be-
;; , hind us at the time we got that thing introduced to get it
.'.1 I passed without accepting that amendment. Fifty-one percent of
the registered voters. We never will get a school system
,'1 consolidated under that provision.
.'.1
CHAIRHAN THORNHILL: Let me tell you what this Com-
~~ mittee has done in respect to that. It is our recommendation
that fifty-one percent be eliminated.
PAGE 65
- - - - - - --- ---- ._-- - - - I
DR. NIX: That's mine too. Okay. That's good.
Now I'd suggest that you consider this. I don't know -- I
" haven't spent but just a day or two thinking about this. But
'- I would suggest that in some way -- and I think you need to
put it in the Constitution probably in some fashion -- that
the State Board of Education would have to submit a school
b district organizational plan to the Legislature at least once
q every twenty years or twenty-five years. At one time I had a
1ft school district organization drafted of fifty-four school dis-
;,,1
Jl
;:
;.:
tricts
in this
state and I
had the justification I
thought to
:>
".
~
I,' 0 put .it across, but I couldn't get anybody over here to even
"
"". :. look seriously at it. And you are not going to get much conso-:
, lidation in the administration and the op~ration of the public l~ schools of this state until some of the counties start consoli- l
,') i dating. The closest thing to that is Marian Sly in Webster '2"
c'
.~ County, where we've got that one highrchool to take care of all
of the students in three entire counties. But that is by con-
,,/ tract. That is strictly by contract. Now when that contract
.,,; expires I don't know what will happen but in some fashion the
Constitution ought to make it easier for citizens to consoli-
date. We need a hundred and eighty-seven school systems like
we need a hole in the head. A hundred would be a gracious
plenty in this state. Now I know, Mr. Superintendant-to-be,
that may not sound real fine, but it makes absolutely no sense
PACE 66~
to have one superintendant and one Board of Education operating' i
one school and we have those in the state. That's too expen-
sive. Jim can get up all the information on that for you.
An Item -- Let's see what was that? B under item 1,
I mean Item 2, where it says the General Assembly shall have
the authority to make provisions for local trustees. You
don't need local trustees. And I've already mentioned the one
under paragraph six.
The last thing I would say to you is this, whatever
,u
you do do not write that Constitutional provision to where you
i;
~.
have an appointed Board and an appointed State Supertendant
.,
;:';;,Y'1 \ I ~, I'll tell you why in just a minute. Had we had an appointed
1
,,!'~il:,;~)\r-"!'!''''''~ ~ State Superintendant and an ~ppointed State Board of Education
. __ .'
I
Lj
" in about '67 or '68, when John Mitchell, the Attorney General
1) ,.1:, brought suit against me and the State Board in eighty-one of
1() ~
r., the local school districts, we would have had chaos in this
I
~
; 7 ,<> state. Lester Maddox was governor at the time, bless his heart.
And he was easy to work with except in this one area. When
;9
, that suit was filed the'news people ran to Lester's office, or
)".
Governor Maddox I guess I should say. Put that in there. Say
_! 1' Governor rather than Lester. They ran to his office with their
television cameras running, "Governor, what have you got to say
about this?" Well the Governor said what one expected him to
',J
say. He said, "If I were the teachers I wouldn't teach and if
I were the children I'd let the air out of the bus tires".
PAGE 67 Well here they came across the street the newspeop1e, "What , have you got to say? Governor Maddox said " so and so? Now
,
" had I been appointed, do you know what I would have had to have' said? I would have had to have supported the Governor or walked out of that office. But I was a Constitutional officer and I got my office just like he got his. I was elected. And I could do what I thought was best and he couldn't touch me. And that's what I did. I said,"we'll abide by the law. I don't: like it but we'll abide by the law." Now another example as I told Governor Dunn in Tennessee one time when he talked to the chief school officers at our annual meeting and he was for an appointed superintendant.
..J. He appointed Mr. Stembridge up there and then fired him about four months after he made his speech in support of the appointed
I " .~ system, because Stembridge wanted to do what he thought was
,_~'
.1 '" best for education and the Governor wanted him to hire some Cl
I' ," of his po1itical cronies and he wouldn't do it. When an elected superintendant walks across the street
and stands before the Legislature. he can ask for whatever he ~i) thinks is right. He can come to this room and testify before
education committees for whatever he thinks is right. He doesn't have to ape a Governor. He doesn't have to mimrnick or quote his Board and try to take their position. He can say the Board's position is thus and so. but my position is so and so. Many times I would disagree with the State Board of Educa-
!i tion over there.
MELVIN HILL: But that's what's hanging up the
; Committee responsible for looking at this, the fact that the
't Executive Director of the State Board of Education is not 5 accountable to the Board that he's supposed to be adrninistering~
,>
DR. NIX: No. He administers. If he violates the
I law the Attorney General can kick him out of office. The State
h ! Board of Education can't kick him out of office and that's the
',j way'it ought to be. Now if you appoint the State Superintendant
u then you ought to get the Governor out of the business of
'.? 7
~ appointing the State Board.
;,
MELVIN HILL: You wouldn't object as long as one of
the two bodies were elected?
DR. NIX: Well my public position all the twplve
h ~ years I served as State Superintendant was that public educa-
,0
",
.~)
j (.
l~~
~,
tion was
too
big
a
business
and
too
important
for
people not
z':~
<'
:~ to have a vote on it"at some point. And that either the
State Superintendant or the State Board of Education ought to
1') be elected by popular vote, one addition. If ten members of the:
State Board of Education ran for their positions by popular
Jl vote they could run for Congress just as easy over aCongre'ss-
I ional District. Who would pay their dues or their entrance fee
and campaign for membership on the State Board of Education for
what $36.00 a day once a month or twice a month, whatever it is:.
> It doesn't make sense. But what would happen if you go to that!
PAGE 69
- --~------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
then they are going to want ten or fifteen, twenty thousand !
2 dollars a year a piece for being a member of the State Board
of Education and what are you going to have? You are going
to have ten administrators,one in every Congressional District
" trying to tell the Superintendants in that District what to
t, do.
'7
MELVIN HILL: What if they were selected by the local:
x elected Board Members1
DR. NIX: No, because I don't think that would do.
i') Too much cronieism would be involved in that. It makes more
,; sense to elect the superintendant. But if you are going to
;.1 l.
""' change it. If you are going to appoint, then you ought to let
the Legislature elect the State Board of Education .
MELVIN HILL: The Legislature or --
DR. NIX: ,The members of the Legislature, the members
,.
> of the Senate and the House in each Congressional District get
;:~ 7
together and elect the member that would serve that district.
MELVIN HILL: Oh, and that would satisfy you?
DR. NIX: No, I didn't say that would satisfy me.
\ MELVIN HILL: You would support that?
DR. NIX: No, I wouldn't support it.
MELVIN HILL: You wouldn't oppose that?
DR. NIX: That's the way they do the Highway Board
now.
MELVIN HILL: Well what's hanging up that committee? ,
l' j\CE 70
"~
~_._._.---,
i
It's not this Committee that's worrying about that, but they've!
1
been
DR. NIX: I've been misquoted to that Committee
somewhere. So I've gotten the word and-I told Judge Smith,
Sydney Smith, in the courthouse in Gainseville, I ran into him
one day. And he said, :"Jack, I understand that you would agree:
for the State Superintendant to be appointed". I said, "No,
,; Judge", and I says, "That's not right." So we had a little
discussion. I think Robin Harris may have said that I was
MELVIN HILL: It was corrected in that Committee.
;":'
Ii ~ Judge Smith indicated that you would only approve that only ::> 0.
J.~ .1 if the Board Members were elected.
2:
DR. NIX: But I tell whenever you stand before that
1'1 t; Appropriations Committee down there as a State Superintendant
.(
1:
15 .~ of Schools, it's good to stand there with the assurance that ..? )
I c, .i, they can't touch you, the Sta te Board can't touch you, you can (j
1; :; speak for the kids of the State without anybody interfering
i
with you. I got thirty-five million dollars in teachers salar-
le; ies one year when Jinnny Carter was fighting me tooth and toenail
o down there. Jim, I don't know if you remember that. You may
2) have been in the Department at the time. Anyway, Jimmy, he
didn't let us have a nickel for salaries that year and he
accused me of not being for children, you know, and not doing
anything for children, was going to put it all in teacher's
"', salaries. Well what's better for a child than a good teacher?
. ....__ . .
._ ,'
. . __. . ~
~,.__ ....__. .~_. . ._.__ J
PAGE 71 l,
You can't do anything for a child any more important than im-
proving the teacher. So I could go down there and ask for the
money even though the Governor was fighting me tooth and toenail
and we got it.
MELVIN' HILL: Of cour~. the difference between the
State School Superintendant and every other one of the elected
executive officers is they have the Board that is supposed to
be setting the policy for education
DR. NIX: I have no quarrel with that.
jll
MELVIN HILL:
and then the Superintendant is
'I ~ their Executive Director. So that's what's troubling them.
e
o.
I
_~. It appear~ that the Board should have more authority. managemenh,
,
y, control. whatever. over the Superintendant than they have. Be-!
_. ..--,-
U . cause you could have a situation. and we haven't had it eVident~
<i j:
':; ly in Georgia in anyone's memory. but you could have a situatioh
I
') ::: where the Shate School Superintendant would ignore and not
I
I
i:'
<
" really follow the wishes of the Board.
DR. NIX: Oh. no. About thirty days before I retired! I
I had two of the Board Members come into my office and one of
them said to me that they'd like for so and so to get promoted.
a little secretary down in the Department happened to be their
friend. So I just got up and closed the door and I said. "Now
look here. the Constitution says there will be an Executive
Officer to the State Board of Education and I am the Administra~ ,i
tive Officer of the Department of Education and I will decide
-------------" ------_..~._---- ------ ~-~,-----_.. _-_.._,---
PAG[,~ 72 -------------.- ---'---1
who gets promoted and who doesn't get promoted as far as salary:i
is concerned. The Board is powerful as long it's setting
policy, but you don't administer it as a Roard. You set policy.
And one of them said to me. "You mean you wouldn't carry out
one of our policies?" I said."I'd carry it out if it was legal,
but the Attorney General has told me that if the Board adopts
a policy and orders me to payout money that's not legal I am
responsible, not the Board. And I said, if there's any questio~
') in my mind I'd clear it with the Attorney General and if he .
10 said it was illegal I would not do it. But other than that. ye$
;.:)
7
11 :; I would do it. I swore'to do that when I took the office, but
',.
I ,,,
,sVEr,
,; not for the Board Members t'o come in and administer the Depart- :,'
(~--~\
-
((Lj))r'~~"'" '~ ment of Education. And not for the State Board to have it's oW1J1
/ .~:::'~=_~/
,J)
staff out here some place." I told the Board on numerous occas
ions. I said, I'm your secretary. If you want something done
I've got a staff here and we'll do it, but you don't need your
own staff. But you get a superintendant that's kicked in and
out every six months or every year or every time you change
Governors as they do in some states and you will have a problem
VICKIE GREENBERG: But isn't it the reality of the
situation in Georgia that no State School Superintendant for
the last what forty
DR. NIX: Oh. you're corning with that old song and
dance now. Go ahead.
VICKIE GREENBERG: -- has been elected, I mean have
PAGE 73
----- ---------- ------ ------ ------- -------- --------- ---- ------------------ ------------,
I
been independently elected. They've always been appointed and
then reconfirmed by election at the next election. I mean
they've run unopposed.
DR. NIX: I had an opponent.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Oh, you did.
DR. NIX: I sure did. I carried his home town after
I'd been in office eight years. Dr. McDaniel had one last yearl
!
VICKIE GREENBERG: But they've never been victorious
over the appointed State School Superintendant?
[',..1
DR. NIX: Oh, yes. Dr. M. D. Collins did. He won
out over Dr. Dugan, when he was State Superintendant.
() )
)
MELVIN HILL: Well in any event that's a different
subcommittee and it has to make that decision.
DR. NIX: Okay. I've had my say and I know I'm
I retired
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I want to say something here,
Mel, I appreciate Dr. Nix coming and being here with us today
and bringing us this information and I -- while we're de4ling
with local schools and not the State Board and so on, would it
be possible for Dr. Nix to maybe come back and meet with us as
a Committee, as a whole Committee to express these views.
t~LVIN HILL: Of course, if he'd be willing. It will
be in September sometime. If he will be willing to go to the
whole committee.
DR. NIX: As long as you pay my transportation. I'm!
l.' n\ (u'I"' 74
not going to pay my own way down 'here.
)
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think it would be good to have
this view. We've had the other view, very heavily we've had
the other view and I think it would be good for the whole com-
mittee to have this view.
t!
MELVIN HILL: Maybe we could invite Dr. McDaniel at
the same time and we'd have a debate.
DR. NIX: Now Charlie and I don't agree on all of
this. Charlie he likes the appointed part the best. But I
1I'.I' tell you that seat could get awfully hot if you were appointed. I
:;:
11
VICKIE GREENBERG: One last question. The Section
on special schools, do you feel it's necessary to retain that
in the Constitutuion, which is Section 9 that allows for the
special area school to be established by either one district
<
15 '~ or combination of districts.
:J
(tl L~
,":,1.'
DR. NIX: Yes.
]7 '
VICKIE GREENBERG: Cannot this be done under Section
five, under the power of contracting or the power of merger. I' Was there a reason for this to come in 1960, which allowed
counties to form area schools.
".-.1
DR. NIX: Are you talking about the Woodall Amendment
),
passed in November of '601
.,. ''
VICKIE GREENBERG: Yes.
DR. NIX: Well the reason that was passed we could
not get local boards to agree to put in substantial vocational
____ __._.
~.
.J
programs.
PAGE 75 .... -_. _ - - - - - l ----.-~-----.-. Mr. John Woodall was a member of the House from down,
, here at Woodbury. He was a real supporter of people trying to'
i"
get a job. He had a little plant and all down there and he
couldn't get employees, you know, that were worth anything.
That's one of the first things I did as Vocational Director,
Joe,was to get out and politic to get that resolution passed,
that amendment to the Constitution. I think that if you in
s some way you make for State Board of F.ducation to have the
() authority to establish educational programs to meet the needs !
i
1' i \/
of the people of the state to that extent you might get by with~
,!
1J '7"- out it, but other than that you'd almost have to put it in ther~.
~-:
':1
>.
I)
." Now as far as area Boards,
.J
there's another section dealing with!
:; the mergers on the 51% deal. I think you ought to retain that, I
1 f '.. but get it down to a simple majority. If you get it down to
'"
ti
..
{~;
a simple majority you might be able
to
get it
through.
And
:
=,
h
Cl
1.
also,
where
it
says
the
taxation and so
forth,
that ought
to
7 be a simple majority also for those area Boards where two or
more counties would come together.
But, Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm sorry
H, I took up so much of your time talking, but I haven't talked
) about' education in three years. I kind ()f got it back in my
"" blood there for a few minutes.
DR. MULLINS: I enjoyed the education myself, Jack.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Has this ever been utilized to
create an area Board, Section 9, has it ever been?
DR. NIX: No.
VICKIE GREENBERG: So no Board has ever been created
under this. No area school has ever been.
DR. NIX: No area school that I know of has. Do
you. Joe?
DR. FREUND: No. but we do have a problem in trying
to provide vocational education services for highrchool students
in some of our very rural areas. There are about a hundred and forty comprehensive hig~SChoOlS now and about fifteen more are
about to be opened. Those are the easy ones to build. When
',!J i:
11 you get down to those little bitty schools many states have ~:i
gone the center route and students will spend about half a day
at a vocational center and about half a day at their home
; highschool. That's done in some of the urban counties. but
1)::r it also could be applicable to rural areas. I guess. from my
i-J.
understanding of what's in law statutes and Constitution now.
17 that could be carried out by contract.
IS
DR. NIX: Yeah. we did that in Pike County. where old
I' Jim used to be Superintendant before he got there. Harold
Daniel, his predecessor, he would send students up to Griffin
Tech and the only problem we never could get him to send any
money with them. But it has been none just a half day in the
State in two or three places. But it seems to me like it
),
._'-t
should not -- you should give the State Board broad authority
without having too many specifics in it. Don't hem them up as
PAGE 77
rr--------""----'
-_._-_.---------- - - ~- ---------- ..--- ---------- .... --_._--- -.. - --- ------,
! I,I. I think Joe used that word awhile ago. Don't make it too re"
strictive. But anything you can put in statute I think you
:,
will be better of to put it in statute.
Thank you.
Don, thank you, I hope you get elected.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Thank you.
DR. NIX: Several times.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Dr.Nix, we appreciate your
coming.
,, ..
DR. NIX: Joe, good to see you.
,\
l'~'
r:
DR. FREUND: Good to see you, sir.
(Dr. Nix excused himself from the Subcommittee.)
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Well why don't we let Joe and
Jim just respond as Dr. Nix did and we won't hold them up and
go on and wind it up. , i Jim, you want to give us your thinking on number two, I
three and four there please?
DR. MULLINS: I can pretty well say just about what
Jack did. I guess that I have a one problem that I think we
need to at least layout again for legal research. Saying you
are talking about exceptional schools. You've got to also
look at one of the things that have come about since, you know,
this particular item was found in our Constitution like 94-142
and Section 504 of the handicapped Act. There are so many
things in exceptionality that are now provided through these
PAC~E 78
statutes and the administrative law through policy and regula-
tion that's developing is really' something tremendous and even
the statutes that we are having given to us here in the General
Assembly that's passing or not passing, you know, are contribut~
ing to this particular problem. When you say in the Constitu-
tion that you feel this ought to be, then you need to ask your=
self what Pandora's box have I now opened. So I'm very cautiou~
anytime I see these kinds of programs being asked to have the
blanket of Constitutionality given to them. So I wouldn't be ]() that specific. I'd leave those kinds of things to statutes
..'
7-
j! .. if I could. Then that leaves us to three." Should the Constitul.
tion contain any special provisions for adult education", and
I said no. Even though I do realize it happens to be in that
I.; :, special school section and I say that again due to the fact
'" Li ,'j that we've got a problem, you know, that has some foginess
i:;
J
~,
i () ,1": about it. That is what is a common school? What is a vo-tech-
0
,~
I .,/
...:
';C I'::J
nical
school
education
that
the
State
must
provide.
And I
I ~; think again it is the same question as we find in special edu-
!9 I' cation that if we must give in the common school concept an
.:0 education to a child as long as he has an extended free educa-
i
.~ ~ I past the age of nineteen. Then we encompass adult education anl:l
) ; make it part of the quote "so called common school"concept,
-' then we may be extending to the age 100 or whenever people ..,1 might live under the actuarial table one day. So I think that
we better be very very careful about what we accept. There are,
PAGE 79
so many of these things are given to us in the form of a motion]
or emotion or in the form of let's just clean things up and
i put them all there. It's a lot simpler. It may well be at
first flush, but it's after that that problems arise and I
personally think that we are heading for some very very diffi-
cult times in terms of special education or some of the trends
of court unless the Supreme Court abates some things like ex-
tending 180 days. These types of things are going to cost us
tremendous amounts of dollars because it subsidiary services
that must go to special children, psychiatric, therapeudic and
'J
2:
;, so forth. Here we've got the same kind of question. It opens
"
~:: a box of worms that well may be directive as opposed to supportrI
I
ive.
I
"
CHAIRMAN THORNHIL: What about Number 41
'.
1.
DR. MULLINS: Number 4, I think that it hasn't
necessarily caused us any difficulties in the past. I come
from, you know, a state where if it's not bothering us we'd
better find out what it means if we take it away. It's there
for some purpose. It's nothing but a grandfather clause to
begin with. It grandfathered those prior to. Now if you took
it out what would it mean. 'fuo would take them over. What
kind of support would these particular area schools get from
whatever school they are given to for their governance. So,
I think Joe could answer the specificity of that question bet-
ter than I could, but from the standpoint of taking something
h\GE 80
I ! out of the Constitution I think again the staff research might I 2 tell us better who they are, who would they go tOt what are the
receptiveness of those systems to take over that particular 4 kind of support. Once you've got that question answered and s it's in the affirmative and it looks like it's not needed then
I think you could get rid of it. But I would be hesitant to
remove it at this time not knowing its implications.
MELVIN HILL: Did you respond to the contract. I
I)
mean l(e) "Should the Constitution authorize the State Board
10
to contract?" Or we just felt that it could be handled by
.J
Z
:i statute.
0-
o.
DR. MULLINS: I think by statute just like tuition
equa1iztion grant. I wouldn't fool with that in the Constitu-
14 ,, tion.
15,~
'"
MELVIN HILL: One other question if I might, Do you
,
:J
,",
1 (; r..., feel Article, I mean Section nine should remain in the Consti-
l'.
1/
;,
.11
tution
and remain basically as
it
is now stated,
with exceptioni
!v 'J of adult education as a specific reference?
j9
DR. MULLINS: I see no, I see no problem. I've
.~o
talked to a lot of people about it and a lot of people that I'~
,1
t
talked to that I thought would know a lot about it didn't seem I
-.,
"
-
to know about it. Now that bothered me because I knew nothing
- ~ about it either. That bothered me to come up and talk with yO~
'j
folks about it. But generally speaking I don't have any fears
of this particular statement as presently written.
PAGE 81 MELVIN HILL:~Nofea.rs~~btltby~~the-same~token~is~t--'
needed if it's never been used. To what extent are we just
carrying forward a dead letter when it really would not -- does
i not serve the interest of education and state? DR. MULLINS: But could it? You know, I don't know.
I honest to goodness don't know.
I,
VICKIE GREENBERG: The original provision that, as Dr
7
Nix said.was 1960 amendment to Article 7, which was to finance
<) I taxation and public debt of the '45 Constitution.
IO
DR. MULLINS: It was to contract for facility use.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Right, and this was under the
-~
'Y.
(;
I~'
"c,.
0:
Section
on
contracts
for use of public
facilities.
So it was
_I
/. just placed here under the '76 provisions. So it's just really:
'I ~ reorganized.
,
1.
DR. MULLINS: Un hunh.
; (,
~1
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Joe.
~,
Z,
DR. FREUND: I haven't responded to the item about
contracting with private educational institutions and I agree
)" ~. ,\
1(; with the statement that Dr. Nix made, but and also feel that itl i should not be in the Constitution but that it should be by
statute. :Rut I must say something about it because I know that
.:.1
there is a tremendous lobby by private schools to make this a
, ~. legal basis for them to obtain state funds to pay tuition for students attending their schools. If they are not -- well I don't want them to lobby it in. I think it ought to be by
82
statute with plenty of controls or we could have the. state pay-
ing the tuition for most of these private business schools truck
!
driving schools,cosmetology schools allover the place. That
,
"f
if there is a statute, which I would be in favor of, to allow
I it to happen that the State Board be able to promulgate such
rules and regulations and evaluations that would assure (1) tha~
it is a quality education that the students are getting and
, that (2) that it would be being done at a cost that would be
less to the taxpayers than states did operate that in their own I>.n schools. If we have a cosmetology school at Atlanta Tech, we !
11 ,:<, do not have to start paying for cosmetology schools in the rest o.
. ~vEi J' ~ of Atlanta. However, I have been familiar with situations where
(~. ~~\_C!.!""~ ~ we did do exactly this and instead of building a new school
"\'~"~~~::.:;.,..
J1 for cosmetology we contracted with a private school and it only
is ~ cost $800 a year for I think ten students and we then had ten
;.l.: ~-)
I'
-:"1
1,.' ',~ students trained in cosmetology for S8, 000.
Now if we'd have
'.
built a school that that lab would have cost us a couple a
hundred thousand dollars and costs us fifty thousand dollars to
equip it and our teacher would have costs us about fifteen
thousand dollars a year including taxes too, fringe benefits
-,), and everything. It actually was to the benefit of the state .. ) to contract for those situations. And we are not allowed to
do that now under present statute as I have interpreted it to
mean. So I think it should be made possible, but that we need
to be protected from political pressure and all kinds of abuses.!
PAGE 83
MELVIN HILL: What if we said something like, "The
,,;, if,
State Board shall be authorized to contractAprivate educat~onali
\I".:..htt"tfi"i'\ ".
(\ subject to such limitations and conditions as provided by law." I
'! Or some such thing. So that there wouldn't be any direct auth-
orization by the Constitution without a law coming in to estab-
C, II lish such limitations and then if they didn't want to do it,
they wouldn't exercise it and if they did then you'd have your
x conditions here.
DR. FREUND: Yeah. We really can't even cover every='
1(', thing by law. There would have to be, I think, a State Board
II "
u,:
t-
of
Regulations
also
that would go into
it.
The law just can-
not be that specific or that flexible. So I think that it
should be made possible to do it that it can be of the benefit
of the state.
J > ,~;
DR. MULLINS: Let me ask a question right he~e?
,~)
'. :":)
1 r~' fixing to show my ignorance.
If there is nothing in the
,~:'
II
<:
r".t,.
Constitution
that
addresses
this
then
it
could be
done
by
I'm I
statute anyway couldn't it?
DR. FREUND: Correct.
.'u
DR. MULLINS: So why should we mention it if it's --
DR. FREUND: I don't think you should. But I know
if you have the private schools getting their say about it they
are going to say yes. They are going to say yes to the Con-
stitution Committee. They tried to say yes to the Legislatures
every session and they are also at the State Board and the Stat~
84
Board went so far as to get a ruling from the Attorney General.
MELVIN HILL: Well, what r' was worried about what we
really would be saying here is that this would be deemed to be
a public purpose. Because you cannot expend public state money
if you ,do not have a purpose. So there's some question whether
(, Court would corne in to say that contracting with a private firm,
for public education is really a public purpose. So that's ;. the only reason I was thinking to put it in the Constitution
directly would clarify that potentiality. Again it has never
to been subject to a lawsuit. It was subject to that Attorney
'.'}
I, .. General's opinion, but that relates back to the statute. So
I think it does have a potential Constitutional challenge even
if the General Assembly does it under this public purpose
:1 ~". motion. So if this Committee's manner of policy felt that it ,:' r ~ should be allowed, should be authorized that was just to get ':x,:
I" :"~ around it.
DR. FREUND: This is done in most states of the
country. It is permissable to spend Federal Vocational Educaj) tion dollars in this way.
MELVIN HILL: Un hunh.
21
DR. FREUND: It's Georgia statute that prohibits it
.,-"" ....
~e. I don't k~OW much about the special schools and have to
plead some ignorance about number 4. As a matter of fact I
went to some lengths for some additional information. But
Item 4, does that pertain to those schools that are under
1..'----
PAGE 85
special boards? DR. MULLINS: Right. DR. FREUND: Like the Area Vocational Technical
,; Schools?
DR. MULLINS: Un hunh.
DR. FREUND: And what this would do would be to -- I I
' I,
don't what's it do?
VICKIE GREENBER~: Well apparently those schools were
to not created the way this Constitution allows them to be created~
;U This is by referendum and by the voters in those areas affected~
C1
1:
correct? It also allows for the tax let's see.
DR. MULLINS: Wasn't it so that before --
VICKIE GREENBERG: Any pol~tical subdivision which
I + : establishes such a school is authorized to levy taxes. The
~
1<
,~) ~.:'
support
of
such
schools
regardless
of whether
it's
located
in
~
"In
11,1
'?:
'-'
"~
the
territorial
limits
of
such
a
subdivision.
Now I don't know
if that authority is granted to those area' schools that are
created pursuant to or prior to '66.
DR. FREUND: Does this mean that people in. say
in Walton County. can tax themselves to pay for schools in
an Area Tech School in Clark County?
VICKIE GREENBERG: That's how I would interpret it
if they are using the services o~I"t that school pursuant to this
I
section.
DR. FREUND: Right now some of the people in Clark
PAG, E 85 ._--------------.., _._---,._--- --- ,'--
.~-~----- -'"
. . - .. _,~--_
County, including ~he Grand Jury, feel that the people 'in Clark
and Walton County residents are able to use that school. I
" maintain that's not a problem because it's a big favor to the
) people of Clark County to have that school ~ight there so
convenient. They are already receiving special benefits form
it. In addition to that there's about two million dollars of
, State money that goes to Clark County that's mostly spent in
Clark County because that school is there. We've got towns
falling allover each who aren't big enough to support a com-
prehensive highrCh001 wanting a vo-tech school until they have f/ to start paying for it a few years down the road. So I think
.1 there ought to be something that would allow that.
DR. MULLINS: Well this does that. I say and it does
that.
DR. FREUND: Well then don't take it out.
!". :~:
VICKIE GREENBERG: Is that this provision that there
would be no authority to levy outside of that --
DR. FREUND: It's my understanding that it's still
'() legal to spend tax monies in another county.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Except under Section 5, paragraph
4, empower Boards to contract with each other you would be spen~-
ing money outside to another county, outside of your coun~ on !
education.
DR. MULLINS: That's more of a dollar following a
PAGE 86
student receiving a service which that sendin~ school system could not provide. Therefore, it would not be an illegal expenditure of dollars.
MELVIN HILL: What upsets me with this kindof a
provision is that nobody knows what it means and to carry it
I. forward. I mean, it's just gobble-de-gook the way it's put to-i
gether. I don't mind if we keep the exceptions, but whatever
it is referring to I'd like to at least clarify it so we would
know what in the world we're talking about. You know this kind
., of thing is the very thing that we're trying to clean up. We'll
i l t keep looking at it and working on it and see what we can do. "'
j' '. We certainly are not going to eliminate it if it's giving a
protection in some way that should be ret~ined. But at the
14 least I would think we could clean it up.
., t S ,',I
DR. MULLINS: Well I think that is the exact state-
,~, () 'r""~ ment that we've all made. You know this is something that need$ :.:l
,;,
" to be researched by you and your staff.
MELVIN HILL: Right. You're not objecting to uh --
i')
DR. MULLINS: We are not objecting to the researching.
Once you find that it's not going to hurt -MELVIN HILL: Un hunh.
DR. MULLINS: -- it's not going to -- if you remove ", that section -- leave those people without a governing struc. I ,'~ ture or means to collect the enrichment taxation to support that
school beyond state allocations, then you know it don't mean
_-_ _--_._-_ , -_._-_....._----_...
.._.._----_.- .._... --_.. -.. _--_ _ .. . - - - _ ..
.. _---,~
PAGE 87
anything. But if you removed it and by that removal you took
away those statutes supporting that Constitutional statement
that says. "Hey. you can't levy a tax outside your territory.
You can only do it in here". Then they say. "Well, where 'am I
going to get my money? Well, you better contract with that
adjoining system and hope they'll give you some. Well the ad-
joining system won't give me none", Now they are left to
suffer their program. So those are the kinds of things I am
making reference to and we don't know the implications until
such times as you look at each of those individual schools,
:,,) T.
~ the authority for their funding. where it is coming from, what
~)
"-
,,'v'." it is being used for and the authority that that particular
..";~;'? .ct,(/\
_.
(r~"t.:.~~\ lr~'~'''''''E ~ Constitutional Amendment gives to them or excludes them from
" "-"-.-._--- '//':
the Section Nine.
.\,.)
" ,~
CHAIRMAN nIORNHILL: Gentlemen, I want to thank you
16 ~ for coming and being with us and sharing with us your thoughts.
2.
<l
l 7 ';; and your expertise in these matters. You've been a tremendous
help to us. Joe, I don't believe I have ever formally met you
through our Associations in Education so it's been a pleasure t~
I
me to --
DR. FREUND: If things go right we'll probably see
each other quite often.
,1
CHAIRMAN nIORNHILL: I hope so.
Jim, it's always a pleasure to see you.
DR. MULLINS: My pleasure.
PACE 88
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: I think what we'll do at this
point is we'll excuse you gentlemen. You've been most bene-
ficial to us and we'll discuss a few little things about our
4 , Committee and then we're going to be ready to go. The hour
-,
is getting late.
DR. MULLINS: Well we're always fun to talk to.
DR. FREUND: Yeah, with Atlanta traffic is getting
rough.
DR. MULLINS: You may have a copy of this I don't know~
i
1U
I MR. HILL: No, I don't think we do.
!I
DR. MULLINS: This is a study, probably one of the
a couple of years ago. But I'm bringing your attention to an
", :~ Attorney General's decision as it relates the this contracting <i r
lS .~; and how you give up the school and there's another one back in .", ::>
1 f~ ~
,o" here that you might find of some interest.
T
MR. HILL: Oh, okay. Okay.
DR. MULLINS: But anyway that gets you into the
govermnents.
MR. HILL: That's one the best meetings we've had.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Yeah, it was. I really enjoyed.
o,
I enjoyed Dr. Nix's comments and so on. Although, there might
be some cQntroversy there. I think it's good to get both sides
,'.- ~
and their view.
_ _ _ ~ ~..
COURT REPORTER:
._~
._~_.
..
Pardon me.
... "_.,. _ _ __ ,~._. .
._.~
Do I really clean up his!I,
. .~. __.__'_._ .. _.__ ._~
._.
....J
language in your transcript.
""""""" ~
PAGE 89
-------, -- --"-" ----"
"-"- ------------"-""--"--
!
MELVIN HILL: No, no. Absolutely not.
COURT REPORTER: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: It wasn't that bad anyway.
VICKIE GREENBERG: No.
I just want to hand out -- last meeting Clark Stevens~
Director of Office of Planning and Budget had spoken about two
-, computer handouts he had on the various county systems and I
l) ii copied those for members. What it does it shows the rate, the
!'-l dollar amount generated per mill based upon the average daily
":z
I. t attendance of each county. And the first one, the top sheet,
c
."
~' > i: ~ is alphabetical. Okay? And it shows also your number of mills
,::... ,j!j.,
..
) for your i ~;_j" ~~ / I~' . "'-':,,''.,
I:~
1 1\ \
_.
,"'!:"'U
i,!
~;:
\ "-
'.
'"
DELORES COOK: Averap,e daily attendance.
VICKIE GRiENBERG: Well that's the dollar amount
"
~~~~county , (\
::'
,"2",
per mill
generated
and
the
second
one
is
in
order
of
the
county
7-
~
I " 'c't',' which generates the most, which is
down to the
, county which generates the least, which is Jefferson. On that
!') ! first sheet the second column represents the local millage for
education less the required local effort rate.
21
Which is interesting. It shows you the great diversi~
-~ 1 ty in what each county has to play with, you know. Some coun-
ties have what -- Some counties have like, like -- what is it 'J I called? 'Do you know?
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Tolliver.
independant systems as well.
CHAIm-fAN TIIORNHILL: Do we need -- I guess we need
to address the decision agenda that we've heard spoken today.
I, Do we need to go down it on an itemized basis? There are not
but two of us here.
VICKIE GREENBERG: Right.
,)
MR. HILL: Well if we're going to --
1(; 1,.1
CHAIRMAN TIIORNHILL: I think we've pretty well got a
11 ~ general consensus from all the people unless there's some
D'.
i~':;'Yl1.cJ ' j ,'; violent disagreement, Mrs. Cook, that you might have concerning
(rd)Jr"''''''" ~; any of thos e
-,,:/1/
,;'
I,..'. ~
MS. COOK: No.
" 1:
CHAIRMAN THORNHILI~: Do you have enough direction,
".:,J
:;
l () ~~ Mel, from the thoughts of our speakers that
".'
MR. HILL: I think we have enough to draft something
for next time and, you know, the Committee will be reacting
l'i i: then to it. I see that they do feel there should be a statement i I about the j~risdiction of the Board over Vo-Tech programs and
21 I perhaps something which we might decide to eliminate but at
least for purposes of looking at it the contracting with private
educational institutions. No new Board created. I don't know
where we stand with respect to whether or not to give the
Liaison Committee anymore responsibility. I guess the feeling i
_._._ .. ~-~----~"-~._..
i
----._-~._-------'
PAGE 91
was no, don't give them any extra authority.right now.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Right.
MR. HILL: So, and I don't know whether we ever did
resolve anything or not about l(a).
VICKIE GREENBERG: Well I think you got --
I)
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Well I noticed this. There
ought to be some provisions for vocational opportunities to be '
? made. I said yes, but not Constitutionally. That was pretty
II much what I picked up from what they were saying.
!U
MS. COOK: In favor of --
\.:z.1
I,
MR. HILL:
,j'
:c,'
'.&.1
} 1- ~~ to address it.
There's nothing we can really say in here
,.'L
r
CHAIR11AN THORNHILL: Right.
i1 ~
MR. HILL: Then I guess then in 2 -- Well the whole
!.~
I
, , thing goes back to that Section Nine, whether or not we should
:,
) ILl keep carrying that ,forward. I think before we make do for I.: i.;,'
'f I~
purposes
next
time
is
keep
the
Section
Nine
in
there
to
try
to
editorialize it and --
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Right. I think that's --
MR. HILL:
and let's reduce it and see how much
2i we have to retain of it and do some more research and see
whether it could be eliminated. The fact that it's been there
an~ it's never been used makes me feel it may not be worthwhile
to retain it and yet as Jim said how do you know it might help
you in the future.
CHAI RMAN THORNHILL: Tha t 's right.
MR. HILL: There may be some broader authorization
in this respect would be enough rather than all the details
.1 1 I feel like that goes on and on with an awful lot of specifics.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: That's my opinion. I think
that's where we get into a lot of things that we need to do
with our present Constitution and that's to get some of the
MR. HILL: Junk.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: -- junk out of it. That's what
\(1 our job is.
7-
I'~
VICKIE GREENBERG: It could almost be made -- well
L ,I I'll have to take a look -- a part of paragraph one of Section
five, which talks about consolidation and merger of systems
into area schools or into
1~l (~I
MELVIN HILL:
Well let's keep it special
Itl <0 first.
()
L
!"7 '~
VICKIE GREENBERG: -- or into paragraph four I which
x talks about power of the Board to contract. There may be some
way we could incorporate those provisions.
,I
MELVIN HILL: Let's just first of all look at what to
do with it itself and then maybe we'll decide we could merge it
) " with another section.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: This whole business of quote
4 "special education" I kind of take Jim's stand on that thing
we're getting ~o many Federal laws and legislation and this
PAGE 93
sort of thing and like he said I'd try to go very light on that
and anything that we put in the Constitution at this point.
MELVIN HILL: Well I think we have enough at this
'f !I point.
.l
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: We might be putting ourself in
a box that we can't afford.
Very good. So we are scheduled 'to meet the --
MR. HILL: Twenty-first of August at 10 a.m. with
,,' ~ an understanding that we will probably here after lunch.
)u
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Will you conmunicate this and in
,:.:,)
.: l t- your communication to the members of this Subcommittee emphasis! ":"': ::0.. that we are going to be looking at the draft now. It's going
to be -- it's really very important. None of them haven't been
important, but I think that one is going to be.
"
J.
Mel, do you think we will be in shape to present
", :1':
:~l
Ie ~' something to the full Committee after that meeting?
l1R. HILL: Well remember we've already scheduled
i ": a meeting for September 4th of this Corrmi ttee as well. CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Oh, that's right. I forgot
:(, about tha t
MR. HILL: We will then on the 4th have a final
draft -CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Final draft.
MR. HILL: -- just get our stamp of approval and get it to the full Committee the week of the Sth.
PAI:E
94
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Very good. Are the other
~ , Subcommittees shaping up with what they're going to be --
MR. HILL: They seem to be moving fairly well. Of
course, that one Subcommittee they've just been rehashing the
same old thing. for the last year.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: Which one is that?
MR. HILL: State Board.
CHAIRMAN THORNHILL: State Board still
')
VICKIE GREENBERG: Oh, yes. I thought they had
III given up. Forget it.
MR. HILL: I've heard the same argument stated at
:.
.. least thirty different ways and thirty different times.
i~~)r'='''" .
(Whereupon the meeting was adjourned at 4: 30 p.m.)
,
/~//
- .../" /
1-1 ,
PAGE 95
C E R T I F I CAT E
I, Mary Lou Stokes, GCCR #B-36l, do hereby certify the the foregoing 94 pages of transcript represents a true and accurate record of the events which transpired at the time and place set out above.
,)
,I
,0 7-
II ;::
;. :1
.:.l~
" I{ ~
z <
,'I)
'11
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on July 31, 1980
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7-31-80
Proceedings. pp. 2-4
SECTION II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Paragraph I: State Board of Education (Jurisdiction).
Vocational Education. pp. 4-41, 75-77 Cooperation with Board of Regents. pp. 41-59 Contracting with private institutions for vocational training. pp. 60-62, 79-87 Special schools. pp. 62-63, 74-75, 77-79 Adult education. pp. 63-65, 80 School district organization. pp. 65-66
SECTIONS II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, and III: STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT Appointment. pp. 66-73
SECTION VI: LOCAL TAXATION FOR EDUCATION Paragraph I: Local taxation for education. pp. 89-90
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 7-3~-80
Proceedings. pp. 2-4
SECTION II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Paragraph I: State Board of Education (Jurisdiction).
Vocational Education. pp. 4-41, 75-77 Cooperation with Board of Regents. pp. 41-59 Contracting with private institutions for vocational training. pp. 60-62, 79-87 Special schools. pp. 62-63, 74-75, 77-79 Adult education. pp. 63-65, 80 School district organization. pp. 65-66
SECTIONS rI: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, and III: STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT Appointment. pp. 66-73
SECTION VI: LOCAL TAXATION FOR EDUCATION Paragraph I: Local taxation for education. pp. 89-90
PAGE 1
Proceedings of the meeting of the Select Committee onConstitutiona1 Revision, Subcommittee on on Article VIII Education Section IV, Board of Regents Tuesday, August 12, 1980 Atlanta, Georgia
-,
1"
__._---_ PAGE
- ---_ ...-_ .. -. . ..
2 ..... _._--,
PRO C E E DIN G S
MS. HAGER:
Since everyone was not here at the last meeting
we might want to first review the conclusions that
were sent out. Why don't you just sort of run down
those briefly and then we'll get into the wording
of this proposed draft.
MR. HILL:
Okay. I'll review for the committee what the
~ ,i
questions were. We had a decision agenda prior to
.J T
the last meeting which you should have had a copy
" "
of. And we asked Mr. Jim Mullins who is the Director
of the Educational Improvement Council to come and
speak to these questions on the decision agenda.
And Jim did come and he spoke for a half an hour
to forty-five minutes answering these questions. And
then the committe itself went back through the agenda
to decide how it felt on these various issues.
So in order to bring the committee up to date
so they understand what's happened up till now, Iill
just go through this briefly.
The first question: "Should the composition
of the Board of Regents be changed?" And Jim Mullins
said no, he thought it was working well and there
was no need to change the composition. The committee
also agreed with that,
that
there was
PAGE 3
- -~~--~--~._. ~.~- -~---- -~--~-~-
no need for
changes on this.
The next question goes to the method of selection
of the members of the Board of Regents. Jim Mullins
said, no, that was not necessary either. That was
working well. And the committee agreed.
Thirdly, "Should the term of the members of the
Board of Regents be changed?" Jim Mullins felt that
yes, a four-year term would be preferable. He also
felt, you know, similarly, the State Board of Education
should also have a four-year term rather than a seven-
year term, which they both have now. But the committee
felt that a seven-year term was appropriate and decided
to retain the seven-year term.
The fourth question was: ~Should the position
of Chancellor be provided for in the Constitution?"
The committee felt that no, there wasnQ, need for
that and Jim Mullins felt there was no need for that
either. That should be handled by the Board and by
statute.
The fifth question was: "Should any of the specific
powers and duties of the Board of Regents 'as provided
by law existing at the time of the adoption of the
Constitution of 1945' be brought forward directly
into the Constitution?" Jim Mullins felt, well, no,
";
-';:1
J\
~'Y.L~
~
:' \
" l~:h0) ,
~,,'
' <~_:~/
'-'
c
z '"
~:
"1 e "1:
'" i ~~ lp ..::> " w 0 1
..:,
cti
1~~
I9
',; 'I
,.
,., 1
,,1
~
PAGE 4
not necessarily. He felt that the language was satisfactory the way it was and he would have preferred to leave it the way it was but the committee in considering this question felt that, yes, some of these laws that are referenced in the Constitution could be brought forward and particularly the lump sum allocation provision and from the other statutory provisions in the Code. And when we get into the draft, you'll see what has been brought forward. And if you have any questions about why this is altered, I'll be happy to explain again.
The sixth question was: "Should all state-supported institutions of higher education be required to be under the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents?"
Jim Mullins felt, no, not necessarily. But the committee felt, yes, that was something that was important, at least henceforth. There was no feeling on the part of anyone that the present situation DeKalb College should be affected by the Constitution but in the future they would prefer--the committee felt that it would be advisable to have all the statesupported instituions of higher education within the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents.
The seventh question was: "Should independent school systems continue to be authorized to 'add thereto
PAGE 5
colleges' ... ?"
"
'
Jim Mullins said, no, that wasn't really necessary.
It hasn't been done by independent school systems
and it would be inadvisable in any event, which many
agreed with that. They should not continue to be
authorized as colleges.
"
The eighth question was: "Should a statement
be included in the Constitution encouraging cooperation
between the Board of Regents and the State Board of
i!
Education in the development and administration of
vocational-technical education programs?"
Jim Mullins felt, no, that a statement of that
kind to encourage cooperation really had no place
in the Constitution; although he did feel that he
would have liked to have seen a provision for the
governance of vo-tech education through some joint
liaison be provided. The committee itself discussed
this and felt that no--this was not something that
should be included, either a statement encouraging
cooperation or a position on the governance of vo-
tech programs.
The ninth question was: nShould public educational
institutions be specifically authorized by the Constitu-
tion to contract for private educational services?"
And Jim Mullins felt, no, that should be a matter
,I
Ie
ct.
!"
(')
1:.::
," , (, ].
t,;,l
... i
1x ;9
,~\,.
I
PACE 6
of statutory law and the committee agreed. The tenth question was: "Should the provisions
concerning the 'Program for Elderly Citizens' ... be continued as constitutional provisions?~
And Jim Mullins felt, yes, probably from a practical political standpoint that it should be. He would prefer that it be statutory if it could be but he wasn't sure that it could be. The committee felt that it should be continued as statutory, if possible, so that's a decision you'll have to make today about that.
Finally, "Should"--there were two questions that were mo~a matter of housekeeping and organization than substance and they were: "Should Section VI of Article VIII be incorporated into any other Sections of Article VIII?"
This is the section that talks about grants and requests of the Board of Regents and the State Board of Education and the University System. And the thought was that could just be transferred here and then eliminated as a separate section. And the committee felt that would be a good idea.
And also: "Should the provisions in Article X relating to student educational assistance be incorporated into Article VIII?" And the feeling
PAGE 7
was, on the part of the committee, that yes, that
would be a good idea as well. In Article X there
is a section relating to student educational assistance
and it would have a logical relationship with this
Article and it would be easiest to have it here.
So that's a brief summary of what transpired
at the last meeting. And based on the decisions that
were arrived at by the committee at that time, we
drafted the proposed revision of Section IV on the
\.
Board of Regents which you have in front of you. Any
questions about the meeting we had last time with
the Decision Agenda or any of the debate?
MS. HAGER:
I guess we'll just start on our discussion of
the proposed draft then. Shall we take it sentence
by sentence or would you---
~~ MR. HILL:
Well, first of all, has everyone had a chance
to read through it? I guess that's the first question.
And I can explain some things rather than go through
it sentence by sentence. Now, I can explain why I
have done a couple of things that I have done and
that might answer some questions.
The present provision contains quite a bit of
information on the filling of a vacancy on the Board
in the case of the death, resignation or any other
cause before expiration of a member's term, how it
should be filled. The Board appoints a replacement
until the next session of the legislature at which
time the Governor appoints someone and then it has
to be confirmed by the Senate.
We have eliminated from all of that about vacancies
because in Article III--excuse me, in Article V on
the powers of the Governor, one of the provisions
states that unless otherwise provided by this Constitutio~
or by law, the Governor shall fill a vacancy in any
public office.
And there's a provision in the statutes right
",
-1
; c, ," <1 '":) ,~rJ
I (', Z
Cl
-..: .c:
"'
now that authorizes the Board to appoint a successor to itself until the next sessions. In other words, the exact language we have here is now in the statute. And the Constitution in Article V says that the Governor appoints unless otherwise provided by the Constitution
or by law. It's presently provided by law. There
doesn't seem to be any reason for a c,hange. :!
And, as a practical matter, the Board goes to
11
the Governor to find out who they should probably
appoint anyway so that they don't have somebody on
there for six months and then somebody new. So I
don't feel that there's been any change in what's
PAGE 9
going to happen based on this omission from the draft.
So that's one thing.
,i
We've retained the seven-year terms. We've re-
tained the same number. And I don't feel there's any real difference insub~paragraph (a) than exists
(\
under the present situation.
And sub-paragraph (b) is the same, the first
sentence. And the second sentence is a new sentence
and this is one you may want to discuss. But the
I, t'
second sentence was the recommendation of the committee
in its discussion of this to the effect that the Univer-
,I
sity System should include all state-supported institu-
tions of higher education in the future. So that
they're all under the ambit of the Board of Regents.
As you'll notice, it says "created after July
1, 1983" so that this will not under this new proposed
revision have any effect on DeKa1b College.
MS. HAGER:
What is the definition of state-supported? Some
of the people were under the impression that maybe
some private institutions receive funds from the state.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I was going to ask that same question. It's
rather broad. Under the Tuition Equalization Grant Program we have, we really support almost every institutio~
,__, , J
PAGE 10
of higher education in the state, public and private.
, MR. HILL:
"
I think that's a good criticism although that
wasn't intended by the language, we have to change
it. I remember this coming up and we had agreed upon
o~her language, I think, at that time but it didn't
i
hit me when I was writing it.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
One thing I would also want to ask about that
Ii)
particular sentence. Now, it appears that what you've
Ji ~ <r:
(>
'~
left unsaid may indicate that the present units are not members of the system because it talks about created
after January 1, 1983. What about those in existence?
I know it's obvious but it doesn't appear--I don't
.'".,
think we're saying in that language exactly what you
3:':">
J6
mean.
Q
7.
1'"-, ~" MR. BRYAN:
That would be a real problem trying to define
1'1
which schools are under the Board of Regents and which
aren't.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
,)
But I think if you have state-supported, there's
either going to have to be a definition somewhere
in there or either some other terminology for that.
MR. HILL:
i
__._-_P_A-G- -E- - - -1-1_ . _ _-, - .. -._---_._---~~-----~--._-"~-~_
..
.
jt
:"
Let's just discuss the policy issue, first of
I
all. Do you think this is advisable assuming we can
perfect the language? As a policy matter, should
this be included or is it better left unsaid?
MR. BRYAN:
Tell me again about DeKalb Junior College. That's
the one that's out of the system now? That's the
only oddball?
'I, MR. HILL:
II)
Yes.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
y '.)
::~. \iJ
Well, you've really got another--although it's
not under the Junior College Act, you've got another
oddball situation, I guess you'd call it, down in
that Thomas County thing. Didn't they vote to--
"
:0
~ MR. HILL:
r.
I think they're going to vote in November.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Well, maybe it's this November, but to create
Thomas Community College in connection with that old
privateinstuut.iondown there. Anyway, they've passed
legislation, I know, statutory as well as a resolution
for a constitutional amendment. You're right; it
will be this November but it was last year when that
came up.
PAGE 12
MR. BROWN:
2
What are we trying to do here? Are we trying
-,
",
to say that all post-secondary education exclusive
II
of vocational is to be governed by the BoQrd of Regents
"
unless it's exclusively private? Which we all understand
(.
is--is that what they're trying to prevent--further
7
state-supported schools from being created outside
k
the unive~sity system, whether they be county, city--
9
I
:j
MR.
HILL:
10
I think they're trying to prevent a new DeKalb
1J ~,
College and a new Thomas County from occuring because
they feel that if state money is going to be expended
in this area, it should be under rubrick of the Board
of Regents.
j "; '~ MR. BRYAN:
';
t~
:)
''::;;
Jo '7.
We want a c..ent.ralized university system in the
'a"
'[
L' ~
state and that's what we ought to try to word into
this.
19 MR. HILL:
20
Of course nothing that we do here will prevent
~: i
a local amendment from being passed to set it up and
write itself out of here. So there's a limit to how
,~
--'
far we can go to accomplish what we want to even if
we could say it right.
MR. BRYAN:
PAGE 13
Is there any discussion about that local amendment?
MR. HILL:
It's under discussion but it's not likely that
all local amendments will be prohibited.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
There may be some control put on them but I just
don't see that.
" " MR. BRYAN:
'I
To answer your question, yes, I would like to
see it in here if the language can be perfected so
:;
that all--maybe not state-supported but publicly-
supported by public funds or public institutions
of higher education.
MS. HAGER:
Non-private?
MS. GREEBERG:
Are we trying to prevent local systems from creating
colleges? That's the only purpose of the provision?
It's not to make sure that all--
!\] MS. HAGER:
No, I would say it's more what you said, trying
to get them all under the Board of Regents, not prevent--
because we really can't prevent it with the local
amendment, they can do it.
It's not too common that they're going to do
PAGE 14
that, though.
, i MR. GIGNILLIAT:
No, the expense is the difficult thing. Really,
4
I think the Thomas County situation and any others
that may be planning it are doing it on the basis
of the arrangement that the state has with DeKalb
College. Frankly, DeKalb Junior College is funded
to an extent greater than, to my knowledge, any junior
college in the system from a dollar standpoint, based
on so many dollars per year per student. It's an
ii,
"---
"
appropriation that's in the neighborhood of six to seven million dollars, if I recall that. And I think
that some of these other community groups that may
'--
! ; ...:..
:>
1h
,:':",>'
?-,
C
7
", -,
I!
r.;-
Ig
j ()
be thinking--I don't think they can take it on--I don't know anyone can take it on and ask the local taxpayers for education from that standpoint, but if they can get a grant from the state similar to DeKalb Junior College, then that's what might make it feasible in some areas.
I think it is important that if we have publicly-
funded junior colleges--and again, that Act which
DeKalb Junior College was chartered under is closed
..") ~,
out now through the legislature but you can go this
..'.:.,."1.,
other route as Thomas County is doing with a local
constitutional amendment. Then they're going to have
PAGE 15
i"
to try and see if they can work out some funds from
the state. They won't be able to get it under the
Junior College Act by which Dekalb College is funded
but I think that if we're going to have a public system
of higher education in Georgia, then the decisionmaking
authority to determine the need for additional insti-
tutions somewhere in the state should be with a central-
ized board like the Board of Regents. And they do
have criteriia for establishing additional institutions
and I think that's what we need to preserve and protect
:;
as much as possible with whatever language we can
put in there.
I think the thing that is going to discourage the
; ._~
local community colleges corning up would be economics
more so than anything.
If MR. HILL:
''I
Well, what if we said: "The University System
of Georgia shall encompass all public institutions
"
of higher education except those in existence on June
I,
30, 1983." Now, I'm not sure--does that still--does
that solve our problem of public institutions of higher
education? Would that imply--I guess DeKalb College
is a public institution.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I don't know if you need to make some reference
PA.GE 16
to the statutory provision or the Junior College Act
of 1948 or whatever it was.
MR. BRYAN:
Maybe you want to bring DeKalb Junior College
under the university system.
i MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Well, that's something that's been discussed
for a long time. DeKalb County is--some folks out
there would like to and some don't want it. But the
state's paying more and more of the cost out there.
:1
t'
~.
(
But I don't think it's something we can do under this.
Those institutions in existence or system not,
!I
or those institutions not in the system as of a certain
date? I mean, just exempt DeKalb College or Thomas
()
,<
Jh ~ ,~ o
County because they would be exempted also under this.
~
1 -1
r'.Ir:
::r;
MS.
HAGER:
Well, they've got a long ways to go yet because
they have to get--even if it does pas~he voters,
they have to get the funding and all straightened
.1 I:
out.
MR. BRYAN:
Maybe it's a good idea to have all the institu-
tions under the Board of Regents and we ought to put
them there.
MS. HAGER:
PAGE 17 ------------------ -------------- ----------- -------------------,
Well, public institutions of higher education,
that would be your junior colleges and colleges, wouldn't i
it?
DR. GREEN:
Technical schools are perceived as pos~secondary.
Postsecondary would be perceived as higher education.
MS. HAGER:
I think the term "higher education" may be a
term of art but I don't know whether or not it includes
,-
vocational education.
';":,
, ''""1';.1 DR. GREEN:
Vocational and technical school is normally referred
to as postsecondary schools. And it may be that post-
secondary differentiates them from higher education .
.i MS. HAGER:
~~
And it may be that "postsecondary" differentiates
i,
them from higher education, or whether higher education
1'i
would include postsecondary.
\,r
DR. GREEN:
But that's not technically correct. Post secondary
means just that, that it's past secondary school.
MS. HAGER:
Not necessarily higher education, you mean? So
you could stay with higher education and it wouldn't
.._._----~----_.... _-----------. -_ .._-- -_. __.__..~._----.--------_ .... _ - - - '
PAGE 18
necessarily include vocational?
DR. GREEN:
No, I misunderstood. I mean, postsecondary educa-
tion can be--
~ MS. HAGER:
G
Anything after high school?
-; DR. GREEN:
That's right. That's the way I see it.
Q i: MS. HAGER:
1i)
';z'_J
" 11 --"-
So you would need to define those two terms really. It's my feeling they wanted the technical schools to remain under the State Board of Education, right?
And that would not do so if you just put higher education
here because th~ would include the vocational schools.
MR. HILL:
Let me bring Henry up to date on the discussion.
1 f ?~ MR. NEAL:
I apologize for being late.
19 MR. HILL:
We're on sub-paragraph (b) of this proposal and
we had talked about this earlier. In the second sentence I
where it says~ "The University System ... shall include
all state-supported institutions of higher education
created after July 1, 1983."
There have been a couple of questions r_a___i__s___e___d__._.
J
PAGE 19
about the wording, just some technicalities of the
wording. I think the committee as a whole agrees
with the principle but they're not satisifed with
the way it's said. So there's a worry that "state-
supported institutions" may encompass more than what
they should so the question is whether "higher educa-
tion" is understood to mean what we want it to mean
and not all postsecondary educational institutions.
And that "created after July 1, 1983" would sound
like you were--just excluded everyone that's in it
today and could only include those created after that
date. So there's just some problems with the language.
'.w MR. NEEL:
'.1
You're right.
I can see the points.
All of
I
l,~
them are good ones.
:J
'(, :~. MR. BRYAN:
There's kind of a basic principle in here that
when I read the original Constitution, it seemed to
me that the University System of Georgia was defined
by the Board of Regents. They were to establish the
University System of the State of Georgia. It didn't
necessarily try to say anything about what anybody e 1 se was t ry1, ng to do . It was J'ust charged with pro-
viding a University System for the State.
And
now we're
trying to come back and say, okay,
:
.. - -------.--- _~-_.--_._~--_._- - _._----~----_._--_ ..
_._._-------.-~-,--------_._----'
i)A(;E 20
anything that is university status, that IS publicly-
supported, should be under the Board of Regents. And
3
that's kind of a basic difference to me in what the
4
Board of Regents is supposed to do.
MR. NEEL:
May I respond? You may be correct in your inter-
pretation. The General Assembly-when was it--in
1964--authorized the counties to establish institutions
'j
of higher education and DeKalb County was the only
IU
county that I know of that took advantage of that
law and established DeKalb Junior College, which is
the only, to my knowledge at least, publicly-supported
by state and county funds institution of higher education
~.~
'i J:
.I ) ">
,"'"
::J
, ,..". 1 :,'J ,!
:':>
"
<
!
'".':':'.l
Ig
in Georgia that is not under the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents.
I don't know what the intent of the drafters of the Constitution was but at least it had always been my interpretation as far as that statute that
I \)
the constitutional provision which created the Board
20
presupposed that all of the state-supported colleges
would be under the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents.
')-,
But, periodically, in the General Assembly when
a bill is introduced into the General Assembly authorizing:
!
the creation of a publicly-supported institution--
I think the most recent one was the one down in Thomas
PAGE 21
-----, I
county and that triggered again in my mind, well, do they have authority to do this. And so I go back to the Constitution and look for some wording in the Constitution that says only the Board of Regents has authority to establish institutions of higher education and it's not there.
So I think maybe that's what prompted the chairman's1Mr. Freeman, who at that time was chairman of the board, in his initial remarks to this group, and it certainly prompted me to recommend that from the standpoint of educational philosophy that perhaps it would be best if all institutions, especially those created after the passage of this Article, were under the jurisdiction of the Board.
Now, it may be the committee1s feelings that it was purposely worded the way it was in the Constitu-
z
"
tion so as not to preclude counties from creating their own county colleges or mostly county-supported, although DeKalb College does get, what, Art--seven hundred dollars a year now per student?
li
MR. GIGNILLIAT: It's in the neighborhood of between six and seven
million dollars. MR. NEEL:
I started, I think, about three or four hundred
6
lL
.j
7. i1
14
\)
u: ::,
it ~ .:> ]7
.l
.)3
PAGE 22 dollars per year so that DeKalb College is directly supported, of course, by DeKalb County and by the state as well under legislation which it could be argued there was some question about but we never have raised it and I don't know that the Board ever would raise the question of whether or not that was a lawful expenditure of funds.
But your point is well taken. It may be that this committee in its wisdom would be of the opinion that counties should have that authority. Now, that particular statute under which DeKalb County Junior College was established is no longer operative. And because of some limiting language--I forget the technicality of it; I have to go back and review my express recollection each time as to that also. But I don't think that there's anything in the Constitution, at least so far as our powers are concerned, that would prohibit the General Assembly from re-enacting some sort of statute that would be an enabling statute by which a county might establish its own college
But I suppose in theory at least we believe that it is--it makes more sense from an edicational standpoint and from the standpoint of the taxpayer to have all of the institutions of higher education, or whatever wording we arrive at under the jurisdiction of one
PAGE 23 board. Your governance cost goes down. Your ability
I,
to plan and to coordinate programs is enhanced if all the institutions are under one board. MS. HGAER:
If we were to put a phrase in here that only the Board of Regents were to have the power to establish institutions of higher education, then the General Assembly--this would have preference over their creating statutory law then that the local systems could-MR. NEEL:
nthink so. I think it has been done in the past. The General Assembly would not of cOurse be tstopped from asserting its will by passing a resolution recommending, as they did in the case of Gordon Junior College, that we take over--that we assume--that we take over the operation of Gordon Junior College which was a private school.
Now, if St. Mary's, Georgia, for example, were to blossom into a metropolis of fifty thousand people as a result of the new navy base going in there and the General Assembly felt like that that area should be served by a junior college, I'm sure that the General Assembly--I'm sure if they passed such a resolution, I'm sure that the Board would give very, very serious consideration to the recommendation for the General
4
:
-j
iU
-'"
",il
j 'J Z -,'.j ~
10
".~
PAGE 24 Assembly so that the General Assembly would still have that input into the establishment of junior colleges in given areas.
But they would--it would be under our jurisdiction. I don't want to give the committee the impression that we are out to take over DeKalb Junior College. We're certainly not. We've got--we have thirty-three institutions now and that's a full load. But there are questions of transfer of credits that are involved from DeKalb Junior College into institutions of our system even as there are questions of transfer of credits from private institutions into our systems.
But all of our credits within the system are interchangeable, at least insofar as the core curriculum is concerned. We are very proud of the fact that Georgia has a system of higher education which we think, and from what other people tell us, is the envy of other states. We can't claim credit for it. Governor Russell and the depression, I'm sure, were responsible for putting all of the institutions of higher education under one board. But certainly I think that they do a good job in DeKalb Junior College and we're not out to take over that institution. It would just seem to be that if I were on this committee that my recommendation would be that any
PAGE 25
------ ---,
institutions of higher education, or whatever wording
i
"2
you decide upon, which is established are the effective
date of this Article should be under the jurisdiction
of the Board.
The Board has statutory authority now to create
institutions and it has exercised that authority creating
a large number of junior colleges and in elevating
some of the junior colleges to senior college status.
I know of no plans at the moment to establish other
junior colleges, although from time to time delegations
of people come in from counties like Gwinnett County
which is a very fast-growing county and Lawrenceville,
there's a group over there that's interested in the
<
h -~
'z"
1
v
possibility of a junior college there. And the Board under those circumstances weighs the effect that a new institution would have on existing institutions insofar as cost and accessibility of young people
.(
to the instituion.
I) I MR. GIGNILLIAT:
.:0
I don't think that the committee ought to try
and decide the pros and cons of the DeKalb situation
in this Constitution. I think that that could be
decided outside the Constitution. There's presently
a DeKalb County Board of Education committee working
I
on this specific question; there's a legislative committee:
PAGE 26
working on it. And if there is going to be a change
or any kind of--in the governance of that or taken
into the University System, I think that would be
4
done without the Constitution. It would require sub-
stantial appropriation of state funds to the Board
6
of Regents to do it, I'm sure.
However, I do think it is important to try and
unify under the Board of Regents any further development
in higher education in Georgia. I do think that's
lU
"z.
i-
"()
"
t,.,
'"
critical. As a matter of fact, in practice, the trend has been that way.
Henry mentioned Gordon Military College requested to come in. If you go back a few more years Augusta,
".,',,:
I'
\') 1.-';)
to
~:
I 0 "z' w ':l 7-
17 ''""
16
Armstrong, in Savannah. I don't know about Columbus--I think that was started initially by the state. But Armstrong and Augusta Colleges were both local institutions that came in.
Georgia Military College in Milledgeville, while
19
.;-
20
they're not trying to get under the Univesrity System, they're trying to get all the money they can out of
21
the University System or from the state. Because
2.2 ,
I I
I,i'
23 il
Ii
.~4 I't
it
2:'
like any private institution they're having problems. I think the trend has been for a lot of institutions to come under the Uni~ersity System and not so much the establishment --this Thomas County situation is
_--- _ - _ - - - ---,,,._-.-. .. _..---- _._-------,,- .... - .....
....
... ,
PAGE 27
unique in itself because of some certain local situation.
And I really don't know how that's going to work out
".,
but I do feel that we ought not try and capture DeKalb
..[
under--I don't know that we could frankly without
an awful lot of work going on anyway. I don't think
Ii
we ought to try and capture them under this situation.
I do think we ought to try and cap any further developmen~
that's not under the sponsorship of the Board of Regents
in higher education.
; I ~ MS. HAGER:
This was the general feeling of those who had
met before too.
DR. GREEN:
Well, you may recall in the initial meeting that
\.') J
~:i."'l
i"
this subcommittee had, you and I and Mel were in attendance at that meeting and this question carne up. And the question carne up because of Article VIII, Section
V, Paragraph 6, which of course is not under the one
that we're discussing at this moment.
And the question that I raised, as I remember,
was, why is an independent school system allowed to
create a college but a county school system is not
provided for in the Constitution. That was the initial
question that I remember about this, in reading this.
It says here the independent school systems are given
PAGE 28
authority to add their two colleges. And my question
was, why only independent school systems? Why not
school systems, you know? I don't know---apparently
4
someone else--some other committee is relating to
5
this particular question.
6 MR. HILL:
Yes. And they're recommending that being eliminated
is
The other committee's recommending that authorization
')
be eliminated so that that will not continue to be
h)
"
II
allowable, assuming their recommendation is carried forward.
So the Constitution provided for an independent
school system to establish a college but did not provide
for a county school system? Now, DeKalb is a county
school system. So apparently there was other type
legislation.
\1'\ MS. HAGER: !i
19
There was. There was special legislation. But
20
we could still put excluding DeKalb if we do write
in here that we would like only the Board of Regents
)1
to have power to establish the system.
MR. NEEL:
I think we could get some wording there, Mel,
without too much difficulty. The point's well taken.
~
J
PAGE 29
MR. HILL:
If we just said that all public institutions
of higher education, assuming this wording, we'd just
have to come back and see if that would do but all
public institutions of higher education created after
July 1, 1983, should be under the jurisdiction of
the Board of Regents.
MR. NEEL:
In existence of created. Somebody raised the
\/k''yi~-d~):\
. ~
"._
. ,
/.....'..
/
;,
question whether or not that would--
. '.'
I 1 >.. DR CRIM:' c..: 0 ,'-
:.:.
c.'
Could you be a bit more precise with the language
.~.-.
,.
~
by simply just saying colleges and universities, which
\.'
;.-
would differentiate that from the, say, technical
:;..
<;
.. j "
\"
or vocational/technical schools?
"
1.'-
:J
. I "
iI.,;
2 MS
HAGER:
(",-
I>.
There wouldn't be other institutions, would there,
except colleges and junior colleges?
19 MR. NEEL:
2(\
Well, there are three--at least insofar as we're
concerned, Lonnie, we have classes we refer to as
junior colleges, senior colleges--senior being four-
year--
DR. CRIM:
I'm not quarreling. I'm just suggesting that
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- - - _ .
PAGE 30
the language would be much more effective if it were
2
more precise and it wouldn't lose itself in interpreta-
tion of saying vocational/technical schools, which
4
currently, for the most part, come under the State
Board of Education. I mean that' sanother battle.
(: MS. GREENBERG:
Have vocational/tech schools been called vocational
~'
colleges? Is there a problem in that?
<) MR. NEEL:
iO
11 'z~"
No, in some states I've heard--in South Carolina, I think they have vocational/technical college in
Greenville.
E.
DR. CRIM:
Well, usually they're called community colleges.
15 ~
":'")
j () .'z"..
0z
<
7 1
I
"""'
If they're largely vocational/tech, they would be community colleges in the sense that they were training both for occupations and for higher education.
I I) MS. HAGER:
-
j9
What wording do you have now?
20 MR. HILL:
/1
Well, we wouldn't say colleges and universities,
~" .:.~
right? Because it's the University System.
.,
~,
.:.~)
MR. NEEL:
24
I'm embarrassed I didn't bring the constitutional
25
provision creating the Board; I had it on my desk .
.. .
.
.
.
._.. ._....
---.J
PAGE 31
.. _ ..... ._---- _ .... - . _ - - - - - - - - _ . _ - - ,
The language in the present Constitution has pretty
I
I
i
., I:::
well been accepted and pretty well been defined. I
':
ii
don't know whether they say colleges or institutions
of higher education. This says "institutions."
MR. BRYAN:
I wonder if you're giving the Board of Regents
some things they don't want. They may be forced to
take some things if we start saying they're in charge
of everything, period.
MR. NEEL:
;:
t-
ooe:
,~
Well, I don't think that--of course I couldn't
l.,;~
speak for the Board. Let me thank you gentlemen for
letting me come to this meeting today and letting
t
,
me say a few words.
I don't think I can speak for the Board. I don't
..; s.
), ,~.,'
think the Board is out looking for institutions. Neither
.c,
r~
do I think it's trying to shun any responsibility
which you gentlemen and lady may feel is desirable
..;
i"
from a constitutional standpoint .
I think that the Board, from my conversations
with the Chancellor and the chairman, would agree
that ideally all colleges, universities and institutions
of higher education created in the future, publicly-
supported institutions, should be under the jurisdiction
of the Board of Regents, however we get around to
PAGE 32
that wording, I don't think they would object to--
2
if we were taking in DeKalb Community or DeKalb Junior
.,'
College, the Board might have something to say about
that. But this isn't going to do that.
But you're talking about created after some date.
\ .~
MR. BRYAN:
There's just something running through my mind
that I think we have a great Board of Regents; they
(i
do a great job and everything is hunky-dory right
<r.:> I.
now. But suppose we get a cantankerous situation. Supposing the University System becomes kind of stagnant
for some reason. Suppose appropriations for the General
Assembly aren't forthcoming to do the job that needs
to be done for higher education.
If we pull this thing under their responsibility
higher education in Georgia becomes stymied except
<I
i7 ~
for the private--purely private institutions. And
18 ii ,
ii
i "I II : I
"7 l
20
I wonder if we want that kind of exposure or liability in the thing.
I agree with your thinking that it's a whole
lot better and, ideally, you said, that these things
should be under one board. But I wonder if it wouldn't
be important for the Board to say, well, Legislature,
General Assembly, if you don't supply us the funds
and the manpower and the wherewithal to keep this
rr----
II
\1
PAGE 33
University System under control, we can't stop the people from going out there and building their own
things and ending up with a hodge.podge of colleges
that may not be what we want for the State of Georgia.
And for that reason I tend to lean toward, just
oI
in principle, of leaving it the way it is. They're
responsible for defining and understanding what we
~ ::
need in the State of Georgia in the way of higher
I
.;
education and looking at whatever's available and
~.:
if)
c1
Z
i
.:..:
0
"'-
~
;
,- ~(,.r:6:..;s.'.~ll)i,.j'.\1\ ... '-"f,lIl; ..-11 c
.. ,..
."
\'-\.. '--
/ii
/'
'.'
, 'j- >..,-
';<
r
j~
,~
"ce
::>
..'" .~ ~.:' z
r
i:
7
'c"o
trying to justify that in front of the General Assembly and, as you say, establishing institutions or taking over institutions or whatever's necessary to build the University System into the kind of system that doesn't need anything else.
And I feel like that with the recission of the DeKalb Junior College Act or legislation that enabled that to happen, that we've had enought experience in this area to where the general feeling in this
i;
state is that we're not going to have a raft of county
colleges and independent school system colleges and
things like this that's going to be built in competition
_. ii
with the University System .
.-' MR. NEEL:
May I respond to that? There's certainlY merit
in w, hat you say. But let me give you an example of
2
7
q
10
:'-r".
1l ,
;.;;:
o
o.
'C
"'" .....
;4 ,-
....
<J. J:
J5 .:>
"'c
;;,
16
co 2-
"0"
Z
<l
1 7 ''""
J8
19
20
21 ,1
PAGE 34
what--of the concerns that r think that the Board
may have in a situation where a county has the authority
to establish a junior college. And using the most recent case of Thomasville and leaving out any personalities because Thomasville's a fine community and they're prosperous.
But if that instituion becomes a public institution it becomes in competition with other institutions of the Board of Regents. And after it is created and if it is created and becomes a public-supported institution, then there will be a demand for state
funds to support that institution just as there is
a demand for seven hundred dollars per student per year for DeKalb.
The Board might say, and probably would say in
a discussion, if the people of Thomasville came to us and said, we want a junior college--r think one was authorized there years ago and they never did take up the option; they do have a private college their now and that's probably involved in the conversion
of that private college into some sort of a public institution., ,
Now, r don't know right off the );~at whether there
is a sufficient demand of the young people to go to i
i
I
college, whether._. there is. a. need. for a. publicl.y. -
._.JI
PAGE 35
- - - - - - - - --------------------- -------------- -----------------supported junior college in Thomasville. We make
extensive studies of that sort of thing when the occasion
arises and a request is made. But we are more or
less powerless to stop the creation of a junior college
in any locality, even though we might have a junior
college. And that's fine if the county wants to support
it. But traditionally, as Art knows, where you make
substantial contributions of funds to one county-
supported junior college and if you create another
one, then they're going to come back and ask for the
same amount. I think the Board's concern is that
that would not be the wisest way to spend the educa-
tional dollar that you might have. That the Board
might say that there is another junior college or
senior college within x miles and it has generally
been the philosophy of the Board in the last ten years
at least to try to have some institutions of higher
learning within a radius of thirty-five to torty miles
of ninety to ninety-five percent of the population
today.
MR. BRYAN:
- I agree with you. But whose widom should decide
that? Right now, wouldn't it be the legislature's
wisdom, saying we don't want to appropriate the money
for another one.
Isn't that what's going to stop
-- ----------- ---- ---------- ---------- --------------- ------------------
PAGE 36
Thomas County if it stops?
MR. NEEL:
I'll let Art speak to that.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I was going to say this. Henry made comment
that the Board of Regents was powerless to do anything
7
about--I don't know if they'd get involved with it
if they did have the power--on this Thomas County
o
situation. The General Assembly was too. That was
JO
handled under local legislation.
And unless you--and there wa~ no debate on the
floor as to whether Thomas County should have a junior
college down there; it was handled strictly as a
1" ..:) ..:.' 0: :,)
16 ~
c
)'
<l
:7 ~
local bill and under the courtesy system which, unless you turn that upside down and the legislature's not going to do because of the many other ramifications, it's really going to be up to their voters to decide
10
through a local constitutional amendment this November
whether or not they're going to tax themselves to
2()
provide for it.
Now, as to that, if that goes to that extent,
there is no provision right now for that kind of opera-
tion to have funds but I'm sure that the representatives
and senators from that area will then come back with
some sort of legislation and say, we're doing this;
PAGE 37
we're doing that; you're doing thiS-fO-~-~~~~~~i~;'-------l I
pretty similar to what we're doing down here even
though that Junior College Act is closed down.
We feel that you either ought to take care of
us under the Tuition Equalization Grant Program or
you ought to fund us because we're a county-supported
operation. In effect, what that does, in my opinion,
is forces the state in the position, if it's going
to show any equity at all in the situation, to fund
'""
something which it really has not gone through any
I:
kind of educational planning to see that that's the
place where you ought to establish education.
And I think if that did catch on and I think
that the economics of the situation are going to prevent
it from doing that to some extent, but I think if
.:.i
that thing does catch on, it's going to dilute the
~
available resources that we do have for state-funded
higher education in Georgia. And that's my primary
concern about it. That if an institution is going
..". u
to, be developed, it ought to be developed under the
umbrella of looking at it on a statewide basis and
not simply because a community thinks--if that community
was going to fund it entirely, ad infinitum, I'd say,
., ,
.I'~
let them do what they want to do. But they're not
going to do it.
__ I
... .. _~_._---------------------~
DR. GREEN:
PACE 38
-- ...--,,--_. "-------'''--'--'''--''-',
By precedent, funding will follow.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I
4 Ii
I think it would. If you're doing it for great
bid old rich DeKalb County, you're not going to do
b Ii
it for these poor folks down here in Thomas County?
-; MR. NEEL:
i<.
That's exactly what they were driving at; the
cJ
funding will follow if they do it for one.
I
1() DR. GREEN:
.. 11 t'o"'
I'
~
.!.;., U
"',l\~,':.'-I~f-.;.:;v;;'::~J;,) ;-e-. ."' "",.
,"
u
":.:.;.:'//
VI
.+ >~,
<f
:::
::'
~ {l ,~o,' 2: .\
l7 ;
Well, I spent eight years in Thomasville. As you said, it's a very fine community. As I reflect on Birkwood Junior College, it was two old rundown buildings when I was there. Now, they may have done
Ji some thing it appears to me that it's going to
require significant capital outlay. Those two old buildings were ready to be torn down when I was there.
18
So apparently someone's put a lot of thought into
]'i
this and apparently it looks like a real possibility
that that can be developed.
But is it being requested by the Thomasville
Board of Education or is it Thomas County Board of
Education?
''+ MR. GIGNILLIAT:
It's Thomas County, as best I can recall. I
___ .._. __.
i
._......J
PAGE 39
__. _ . _ - - - - - - - - - ... --_._-~--_
don't have anything to do with it. But the incumbent
senator introduced a resolution and it was defeated
in the Primary.
il MR. NEEL:
Yes, he was very active inthe support of it and
(,
I'm sure that that--that he will--was prompted by
the need for funds from the leadership of that college
that had been down there for a longer period of time.
He felt a certain obligation to the institution because
"~I
it had supplied an educational need in that area.
_. DR. GREEN:
Didn't the Board of Regents or any other power
indicate back several years ago--didn't they have
~eferendum down there to try to establish a junior
Q.
:.)
Ih 'e\
college and the voters turned it down? MR. NEEL:
Yes. I think that's correct. I would stand
corrected. But I know that at one time Thomasville
had the option--and I'm not sure at this moment whether
they actually turned it down--but I believe you are
correct.
DR. GREEN:
:~
Wasn't one put in Bainbridge?
:1 MR. NEEL:
Yes, it was. One was put in Bainbridge. And
_. _.._...__ .. .__..
..
. _.._.
._ . --..J
~
~
'I', I: i D:
~?
Z
! 1 '.>.:,.
C c.
w ", ~
,l
~y~\
~
r'h~) )r~~~ :~
'----/,/)
'~,._-,"----~'
i
j' >
l-
V> x
]5 " ...:;: :'">
16 az> w 0z
17 '""
l.q
19
20
:'j
PAGE 40 to the same effect down at Gordon Junior College, I do know that Spaulding County and Griffin had the option of establishing or, as we say, picking up the option for us to go ahead with the planning of a junior college under which--under our plans the county pays for the initial cost of the physical plant.
And the voters in Spaulding County turned it down, principally, I think, because of the proximity of Gordon Junior College. And it was at that time that their heads came together and said, look, here's a junior college over here that--a private school that's having all sorts of financial trouble. Why, when it has valuable buildings and land, why should we build one here right next door to it and put it out of business. And then it was decided by the Board that--with the General Assembly concurring--that we should take over the operation of of Gordon Junior College, which we did. But it's not--I assure you, it's not from a selfish standpoint nor a greedy standpoint that the Board wants to go out and take over institutions nor really to preclude counties from establishing colleges. There's only so much--as Art well knows, so much money that the General Assembly will appropriate for higher education and it becomes a sort of competitive proposition with us as to
PAGE 41
---------- --- ---------- -----.-------- I
whether or not we can get our share of that dollar
without having to compete with a county college that
maybe was not necessary in the first instance. And
that certainly was not the case insofar as DeKalb
county.
DR. GREEN:
It appears to me that the center of the conversation
that we're having right now really is who should have
the authority to say that a college or junior college
should be established in a certain area? I would
l'
think that that power and authority should be vested
in the Regents. Now, that's the way I feel about
it ..
-.. MS. HAGER:
1-
-"
'J..
Maybe we should just poll the members of the
I,')
":.>
h~
committee here because it's a subject we've been dis-
cussing for the past thirty minutes and we're going
to have to come to some decision that we're either
for it or agin it, as at they, and maybe work up the
wording if we can agree on the wording. How do you
2.1
feel?
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Yes, I feel that they should have the sole authority
over any state-funded institutions of--well, it would
probably be junior colleges only. I don't think we're I
___ .__.
--.-J
PAGE 42
worried about anybody establishing any senior colleges
~':'
-,
or universities.
, MR. BRYAN:
-!
I feel differently but--
:5 MS. HAGER:
Okay. Well, that's what makes the world go round.
7
Dr. Crim?
8 DR. CRIM:
9
I agree.
10 MS. HAGER:
I agree with you too.
MS. GREENBERG:
Are you distinguishing, number one, between the
creation of a college versus the governance of that
'<"f.
1:
J5 .~..,
institution?
:':">
16 .~.. DR. GREEN:
o
Z
<f.
17 ~
I think from my point of view the Regents should
18 Ii
have the sole power to create and to govern, manage.
19 II MS. GREENBERG:
20 II:i
Because the way that this is presently drafted,
21 Ii
I don't think it would prevent, at least under paragraph
I i 22 I
11
I(b), it would not prevent a system from creating
'I
23 Ii
IIIi
or establishing--
2,.
:1
i!
MS.
HAGER:
Ii
:-:,')" I1'i1
L!l.. . .
Yes. It doesn't say anything about establishing.
._ _.
~ .~
.
._~. .. ~_._~_ . . _. .__~ . ._._~_._ - --------------. -----
PAGE 4,1
~~ s~~~==----- L [- -- just
-----------------~7->1"C-.----
,I MS. GREENBERG:
II
i\
,i
"The government, control and management "
ij
4
II
IIii
DR.
GREEN:
But isn't that what we're determining now by
straw vote that we also would wish to say that the
Board of Regents would be able to establish--
x il MS. HAGER:
i!
II
) II
Can you word this, Mel, to--not only the maintenance
"
11)
but the establishment--shall have the sole power of
establishing? MR. BRYAN:
I think that was pointed out in the statutory
<t 1:
'j
<:J
'"::J
, z;J,J (,
w
0
~?
.::
'" -;!
i~l
provision. The Board of Regents has the authority to establish institutions
The fact of the matter is it's a whole lot easier to give somebody the power to do something than it is to give the power not~to do something, and that's
what we're trying to do.
MS. GREENBERG:
21
We could provide for the prohibition under the
")
section on local school systems prohibiting those
systems from establishing institutions of higher educa-
tion. Possibly it would be better to prohibit it
in that section than to mandate it in this section
-------------- -------------'
------l r------------- --.----.-----
I
under Section V under local school systems.
PAGE 44
I
2 I MS. HAGER:
II
i
I
II
It's a matter for the attorneys. What do you
I
I
II
4 III'
think?
i
I,
I
5 II MR. HILL:
t i\
I don't think it will be hard to draft, you know,
il
II
7 I,
what you'd like. I don't think we're going to agree
it
I
I
8
on it today. I'd say that we understand the intent
9d
10
of the committee here. And Henry's here to work with us on it so it will be agreeable to the Board, at
.." 11 ~z
~ ~,~~ I."o.". lJ ~
least. So we'll work on that. I would say we won't need a meeting of the committee again just for that i f that's all we have to do and we can just submit
l 14
this to the full committee as part of the I report.
l-
'"
.15 ~J: "
This may be the last meeting you'll need together.
::>
16 ~... MS. HAGER:
o
Z
;7 <~l.
And you will define higher education?
18 \1, MR. HILL:
19 1
Well, I think public colleges and junior colleges.
20 \I
I like Dr. Crim's idea.
21 IIII
And now (c), sub-paragraph (c) that I s here is
22 IIIt
presently in the statute, i.if you remember when we
I,
I[
23
I'
it
went through this before. The present Constitution
"
J4[
states that the Board shall have such powers and duties
,
25 I
as provided by law existing at the time of the adoption
ll . -------. ----.--- -------------.-------
PAGE 45
of the Constitution of 1945 together with such other
l
powers and duties as may thereafter be provided by
'1
I
i
law. In an effort to identify what powers and duties
I
I
I
I
of the Board really should have constitutional status,
this by reference attempts to encompass all the laws
in effect in '45 and give them a certain constitutional
status.
And we looked at those laws and very few of them
needed to be--a lot of them are repetitious of what
{~:
Z
1-
C< (",
"-
i2
'"
Ct.
.-
1: t
we already have here so that we've tried to identify with Henry's help some_of the provisions that ought to be brought forward and (c) is the most important one from the Board's standpoint.
And this is language that is identical to the
language in the statute.
'""'::1
1(1 .~;.:... MS. HAGER: Well, the lump sum was whatever we had all agreed
on in one of our previous meetings and that's included?
MR. HILL:
Yes. Okay. So there it is. Does anyone have
any objection to the wording of this or changes?
MR. BRYAN:
Just to get the money thing off the back of your
legislature, what would the possibility be of inc!lnding
all appropriations for higher education, not onl,y:
- ~
.
. ---~
_
__ _ - - _ __. -------_._---------_.- _.
._----_
PAGE 46
just those designated for University System, be channeled
"
through the Board of Regents?
-' MR. GIGNILLIAT:
-,
Well, you've got some appropriations that are
)
made through the State Scholarship Commission which
()
would be, I guess, probably classified as higher educa-
7
tion purposes. And that's a different authority entirely
(j
set up to administer funds and grants to Georgia students
9 Ii
The DeKalb appropriation is appropriated through
10
the Board of Regents.
,.:;
z
;; MR. BRYAN:
')
u.
"'"'
It is line item?
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
1'": '" 15
' '1..'
:::>
16 zco w 0 Z
17 l:ei;
Yes. As is all the contractual arrangements that the state has through the Southern Regional Education Board for cooperative programs with Maharry [phonetic], Morehouse, Emory and all the medical students
l:~
and veterinary medicine and that type of thing too.
19
I would say right now, there's probably about--
20
I know at least nine-tenths of the appropriations
:1
21 II
for higher education do go through the Board of Regents.
II
22 Ii I'
The only one I can think of really that doesn't--
.~3
maybe Henry can think of others--would be that for
:)4
the State Scholarship Commission.
, ('
l MR. BRYAN:
PAGE 47
-------- -_.--- ------------------ ----- -----l
I was thinking still along the sames lines as
!
i
before of trying to devise some way for the Board
of Regents to control higher education in the state
and prevent some of the wildcat things.
MR. HILL:
()
Well, the Board hasn't requested any extended
jurisdiction on what they now have.
I,
~-<, 11 MR. BRYAN:
50--
I was just trying to give the same jurisdiction
in this way ad in the other. It just sounds like
it's not practical because the legislature can appropriate I
line item things as well as lump sum things.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
; ..i~.
I <\ J:
~
t::t
"
Well, I think for what you're talking about they could as easily appropriate the Department of Education if they wanted to get around this, if we had something in here and there really was a consensus to do that,
you could do it in any--several other budget units.
'" ! MR. BRYAN:
Does this--did I understand the Board that there
are certain funds designated, like the DeKalb County,
when I said line items, is that line items to the
Board of Regents despite the policy of lump sum? Does
the wording in the Constitution preclude any of that
kind of thing? It says: "All appropriation already
--------- -- ----------- ----------- ---
-- ------ ---- - - - - -
____I
PAGE 48
made or hereafter made for the use of ... shall be paid
to the Board of Regents in a lump sum ... "
, ' MR. NEEL:
4
I don't think it would preclude it because of
the present language "for the use of any or all institu-
tions in the university system.. "
Actu~lly we're nothing but a funding vehicle
for DeKalb Junior College. We're also a funding vehicle
'l
for other items too, Art.
iU MR. BRYAN:
,...
' }..j
12 ~
Well, this won't prevent you from continuing to be a funding vehicle?
MR. NEEL:
<' T
lS ','
':J
',"'
1b 'z" w ., "z C~_ I
i ;,.) ; i i"!
Iq
20
,
l
,
,
No, I don't think it would. And I don't really think g that--because the Board really wants to cooperate with the General Assembly in what its desires may be insofar as funding DeKalb Junior College and other colleges, other county colleges. I don't really think that the--I think this language here would suit the Board fine. In the wisdom of the General Assembly if they wanted to fund DeKalb Junior College at the rate of seven hundred dollars per student and they don't have any other way to make the allocation of
"
those funds except through the Board, or if the General
Assembly thinks that that's the propeOr way for--
PAGE 49
-------..---- ..- -------- . . - --.---- -_.--- - .-- .- ..._--.-----._---.- -__-----------1
that's not really a problem for us except it doesn't
!
fit out budget sometimes. It makes it look like we're
getting a lot more money, a greater share of the educa-
tional budget than we should if we have these other
items in there.
There's another appropriation this year, for
example, for Gordon Junior College--I'm sorry Georgia
Military College. And some in there for Morehouse
and other allied line item appropriations.
I really don't know of any other place the General
,
Assembly could put it unless they put it in the Scholar-
-)
C"
)::
ship Commission or some other agency. But that really
,.-
L
is not designed, as I understand it--and I'm not a
fiscal man--but that really has not been too much
<i':
f
.:.
of a problem. I never have heard'--of course the Board--
I.')
1'4 .0
.";.'
I want to emphasize the Board wants to cooperate, as
Art knows, with the General Assembly and its wishes
insofar as being a conduit for funds so long as the
I'
legislature understands that that's what we are.
DR. GREEN~
I apologize for having missed the discussion
in relation to this lump sum by maybe this will bring
me up to date on it. "In a lump sum" means not in
a line-iterm manner?
MS. HAGER:
PieGE 50
f"
i
Yes, right. This is what--their uniqueness,
too, I think you mentioned before. And it's what
they wanted and it worked and this is one reason why
we put it in.
DR. GREEN:
And then I'll have to go from there and say "in
a lump sum" could also be interpreted as at one time
in a lump sum. And I assume you receive allocations
on a monthly basis from the state? I don't know how
If;
that works.
MS. HAGER:
The budget is passed at one time. I don't under-
stand what you're saying. You mean, it's all just
JJ
given at one time or--
o MR. BRYAN:
It says "shall be paid to the Board ... in a lump
.~.
[i g,
sum... "
U' I"': DR. GREEN:
19
"In a lump sum ... " Like you said, all the money
through the Regents--a check would be written to the
Regents in one lump sum at one time.
MR. NEEL:
No. We do not, as I understand it--Art, you
. -,
can correct me. We do not get every dime we're going
to get from the General Assembly at one time because
the tax collected monies don't come in.
-, PAGE 51
------------------------------
I
But I think
I
I
.1
what--the broader definition that you have discussed
as it's not being a line item for a specific purpose
or a specific project is what we would object to.
DR. GREEN:
Do you think that politically that could become
a reality in relation to the desires of the legislature?
MR. GIGNILLIAT~
Being paid all at one time?
DR. GREEN:
No, just having all monies flow and no line items.
You see, I'm not sure how the Regents receive this
money, whether it is a line item now or if it is a
lump sum.
'J MR. GIGNILLIAT:
It's lumpier than any of the others.
DR. NEEL:
Over the years there's been a gradual encroachment
of the lump sum idea. As I said, I'm not a comptroller
and we can get that person to come over and speak to
that specific question. But there has been an encroach-
ment. The General Assembly has tended to line item
for, say, certain projects--a gymnaSium at a certain
particular school or a swimming pool at a certain
particular school. And a legislator, to his credit,
PAGE 52
ofentimes is very much supportive of his or her par-
ticular junior colleges and they feel like they know
1:'
the needs of that particular colleges insofar as its
buildings or facilities are concerned. And it's pol-
itically expedient for them to put in or attempt
to get the appropriations committee to line-item for
a dormitory, for example, at Georgia Tech. Now, of
course, when that happens, that interferes for the
I
overal~:?lanning for--not only for Georgia Tech but
! i
for the citizens in the way of priorities. And so
'J :=-
~)
.,1-
r:.
we have at times, with candor and with understanding, tried to point this out to the General Assembly that,
no, that's not in the best interest of the state,
as desirable as it may seem to you to build a dormitory
1.-:, .'J
v 'c ::>
'" !Il Z ~, :'1 Z ~<
:7 '
at Georgia Tech because you have hundreds of letters from constituents saying you don't have enough dormitory rooms and we can't get in and so forth, to let us
do that planning and to let us have a general plan
and we'll sit down and discuss with you what our overall
2(j
plans for the system in general and for that institution
in particular are.
i,
"
We have on occasion pointed out to the General
Assembly that there is a statute that says--and that
,.
,.'t
statute now has constitutional status and the language
is very, very similar; it's not identical to what
I1..1 __
PAGg 53
paragraph (c) is--that appropriations be made to us
in a lump sum basis. But it's principally designed
to prohibit specific or line-item appropriations for
specific projects.
Now, Art, you can speak to that much better than
I can from the standpoint of the General Assembly.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I think the General Assembly has really meddled
and stretched it a little bit while we haven't, to
my recollection gotten down to a specific project.
One or two were put into the Bill but I think it was
worked out prior to the conference but the message
got to the Regents as to what some key projects, or
what the General Assembly thought were some key projects.
nd to me that's the importance of keeping it on a
~;
lump sum basis, is the worse thing we could do is
to go back to appropriating it to each institution.
When you're talking about even capital projects
at ceratin institutions, I've been guilty of expressing
my interest in my area on the Regents too. But I
think the spread--if you'll look at the budget you'll
see a couple of pages in there on the Board of Regents
and you'll see several lines, a lot of which to my
understanding, have been initiated from the Regents
themselves to the extent, for instance, we do fund
Eugene Talmadge Memorial Hospital on separate line
basis but it was pulled out from the Medical College
of Georgia Corporation since we do not determine--
the Regents determine that.
The University of Georgia right now wants a veter-
h
inary medicine teaching hospital pulled out and made
I
a separate item. And that's something that's between
;..{
the University and the Board of Regents not the legisla-
'I
ture unless it's requested that way. But there are
It.:
!"
about eight or nine different things including the
Z~J
2
""
central office budget, the Marine Resources Extension
and some of the new things that have developed in
thft University System are treated--and especially
when I think they're uniquely different from an education:
., "" I:::) "%:
v,
c
l..
1"; ~
al institution--'are treated a little bit differently on a line item basis.
I think probably the broadest invasion of a lump
I:"",
sum concept is in appropriations for teagE~pay increases
I I;
which have pretty well been spelled out in the appropria-
if}
tions. They don't--and the Regents have generally
followed it, although technically they do not have
to.
MR. NEEL:
That's well put.
MS. HAGER:
,
PAr,E 55
Does that answer your question? DR. GREEN:
Yes. MS. HAGER:
Okay. Any more discussion on (c)? MR. BRYAN:
Just that this is identical to what we have now?
MS. HAGER: It wasn't written into the Constitution but that's
the way they operate now.
MR. BRYAN:
This is the way the law is now that is referenced
it
in the Constitution?
MS. HAGER:
Yes.
MR. HILL:
So paragraph (d) is another provision that was
in the statute, not these exact words but these topics
were addressed in the statute that's referenced. And
this was an effort indeed to call forward these provi-
sions because of their importance. And some fear that, for example, the power of
eminent domain which has been given before would be withdrawn from the Board at some point if it were i removed from the Constitution; that would be depenl1ent
" I,E 56 on the statute. So sub-paragraph (d) is similar to (c) although it's not identical language to what the present law provides. MR. NEEL:
That's perfectly acceptable. MR. BRYAN:
I have no problem with that. MR. NEEL:
We do acquire a good bit of property, not too much by condemnations because we usually will work
"'.'
out with the landowner an equitable price. For example, we instituted many years ago when we began the process of acquiring property and the negotiating process wi th the landlord, we try to be very. -bend over backwards to be very, very fair.
We, for example, get three independent appraisals of registered appraisers. And generally speaking the purchase price is the average of those three appraisals which has worked out pretty well. The landowner is pretty well satisfied. Now, if there is a building on the premises, for example, at Savannah State or if there was a building on the premises that was leased for some type of store and the store owner contended that he had some--and he did"'~'some interest in--some leasehold interest in the property that he had on
lease because he had a store there that was operating. And we worked out something there without going through condemnation. We got some appraisers back in to figure out the value of that particular leasehold interest.
Fully--I would say fully ninety percent of the property is acquired by friendly negotiations. And in most instances of eminent domain is where there's a defect in the title. That about the only way that it can be cleared up is through the process of condemnation.
We are the only agency that has the authority to condemn and it is a--if we had to wait for example for the General Assembly to approve the acquisition of property we would---again, we wouldn't get the property when we absolutely needed it, number one, and the property would be enhancing in value all the time and we're better able to negotiate a purchase price if we're dealing from a position of strength knowing that we do have the power of eminent domain. MS. HAGER:
Is that agreeable with everyone? MR. HILL:
Paragraph (e) is the Section VI of the present Article VIII which relates to grants, bequests and donations and it's just been moved over. It has been
broadened some but basically it's the same that we have in Section VI. It's more a housekeeping matter than a matter of substance. MR. NEEL:
It's good to have it here because oftentimes we get requests from IRS and other individuals or foundations or corporations who want to give us money as to whether or not we have the right to accept it and whether or not we are--gifts to the Board of Regents are deductible. And this strengtheons our position as to that. MS. HAGER:
Let me just clarify. We heard so many people speak I'm beginning to think what I'm thinking about goes to the Board of Education. Were they the ones that said that the State Board did not have the power to take over an institution? It wasn't the Board of Regents, was it? If you all vote to take over an institution, you have the power within yourselves to do that? MR. NEEL:
What do you mean by take over an institution? MS. HAGER:
Well, wasn't he the one that mentioned that there was some--do y'all remember?
PAGR 59 DR. GREEN:
I believe Dr. McDaniel made that statement in relation to the State Board of Education does not take over and operate any local school systems except as--through the courts.
And the question was whether or not the court was able to-MS. HAGER:
Okay. DR. GREEN:
If someone wanted to give you a college, you could accept the college if it was a private college. MS. HAGER:
That's basically what I wanted to know. MR. HILL:
Sub-paragraph (f) is a provision that comes from Article IV which is the constitutional boards and commissions Article. And it is a section that was added to all the boards and commissions that we're working with in Article IV. And we put it here as a matter of form but also as a matter of discussion so the committee may not wish to have such a provision but it was felt advisable in order that the boards-in other words, it's not a matter subject to objection by the boards. So this is not in the present Constitu-
tion, in other words. MS. HAGER:
'" :~
Why was that not put under (a) just as a matter of--? MR. HILL:
It was a matter of style. We, in the other boards, used paragraph (a) to establish the board itself and whatever the mechanism was for setting it up. And then (b) or (c) or (d) would be the powers. And the last one would be the general provisions about removal from office in composition. It's just a matter of style that we adopted earlier. MR. BRYAN:
Are those pretty well established by law now? MR. NEEL:
I don't know that there are any--well, there
c.
are some provisions in the Constitution which y'all have probably run across about holding public office. I don't know that there are any qualifications as such set up for--by statute for board members. MS. HAGER:
Is there a residency requirement? MR. NEEL:
I don't think so. MS. HAGER:
[-,,-'ICE 61
There is, isn't there, for the Board of Education?
..: )
MR. HILL:
':;-i
Yes, there is for the Board of Education.
MS. HAGER:
But not for the Board of Regents?
MR. NEEL:
The General Assembly generally sets the compensation.
There is one statutory provision about removal of
board members who fail to attend board meetings. If
they miss three meetings in a row without excuse they're
certainly autmatically removed. But compensation
and removal, there are some statutory provisions as
to that.
But as to qualifications, I don't know of any
statutory qualifications have thave been adopted by
the General Assembly. But there may be--there may
be, in Title 40, of the Executive Department or somewhere
else in the Constitution or the statutes about--about
qualifications of public officers generally that might
touch on this.
And of course the constitutional provision about
being--having been convicted of a felony, I think,
would also apply to the board. That if they were
convicted they could not hold that office. I think
the board or board member is a public officer.
p\GL 62
Now, the General Assembly might pass some Act
saying that all members of the board should be Georgia
Tech graduates.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
One other thing I would like to ask Henry about
this. I know we've talked about it several times,
statutory authority. Should there be or is there
any protection in the Constitution somewhere about
sovereign immunity as relates to the Board of Regents?
MR. NEEL:
Yes.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
If in something like the--
MR. NEEL:
I believe that's already covered. There has
been a--the General Assembly several years ago passed
a constitutional amendment or they did pass--they
adopted a constitutional amendment and the people
approved it for setting up a State Tort Claims Board.
But that was never .implemented by the General Assembly.
'i
And the court in effect said until the General Assembly
implements that constitutional provision, that all
agencies of the state including the Board of Regents
would enjoy sovereign immunity.
I think that we would like to have such a section
PAGE 63
insofar as the Board of Regents was concerned. But if I were in some other agency, it would immediately raise the question in my mind as to whether, having given it to the board in this case and not giving it to other agencies, we might weaken the dfense of other agencies of the state and I believe it possibly would be best here to leave that alone.
It--the reason that legislation came up, Art-and it did come up--was because of an old provision that was in the establishment of the University of Georgia a hundred and ninety years ago that the university had the authority to sue and be sued. And in consequence of that the legislature had waived sovereign immunity insofar as the University of Georgia and its derivative institutions were concerned.
And, therefore--and that was in the teach pay raise when the teachers sued us and we lost the case and then we came back the next year and spelled that out. So I believe that's been taken care of. But it was quite an inssue at one time, you're correct, because we were singled out until that Act was passed. MR. HILL:
Madame Chairman, one final issue and that's the program for elderly citizens which is on the draft which was sent to you, Paragraph II, which reads
PAGE 64
essentially as the present provision. And the question
is whether you would like to reatin it in the Constitu-
tion or provide for it statutorily.
MR. BRYAN:
r think it ought to be statutorily provided for
simply because you've got every special interest group
in the world who would claim, if you look after them,
look after me. And if it is provided statutorily,
as a practical matter, it's just going to be there
"1
and we're going to provide the services. rd' just
as soon leave it out of the Constitution.
MR. NEEL:
r--again, r apologize, Madame Chairman, for speaking
too much. But let me respond to that by saying the
reason this was put into the Constitutin is because
we felt--and the attorneys, you know, felt that we
didn't have authority to let citizens sixty-two years
of age or older attend units without constitutional
authority. In other words, the legislature couldn't
do it because it amounted to giving away state funds
\;
and that's why it was put into the Constitution with
limitations that it should not include attendance
at dental, medical, veterinary and law schools.
That probably could be taken care of elsewhere
in the Constitution but I'm not so sure that under
the present Constitution--or indeed I am sure that
;',' ,~
it would not be possible for us to do this without
a constitutional amendment.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Mel, isn't ArticleX--I know it was voted down
but we went through this because I know it came through
my committee. We took it out. Then we allowed the
General Assembly to provide by law for certain things
like this but took it out of the Constitution?
MR. HILL:
Yes.
MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Is Article X going to--what's the situation on
the Article X committee?
MR. HILL:
The Article X committee won't be meeting again
but their recommendations are part of the package
and they'll be the same. The problem is they were
recommending something at the time that is now in
.~
the jurisdiction of another~ticle committee so we
have somewhat of an overlap problem.
And so if this committee felt strongly that it
should be in here, it might reverse that earlier recom-
mendation of the Article X committee. But I'm getting
the feeling--we haven't heard from everyone--but if
it could be removed, you would like it to be? MS. HAGER:
I think that was our general feeling. MR. GIGNILLIAT:
I agree with Sibley. I think it should be. Now, I'll say this. As a legislator, I don't remember being lobbied harder for everything else other than that by the senior citizens. That was their big project for the Senior Citizens organization. That was their big project that year. And when Article X came up, we got an awful lot of flack about taking it out of the Constitution.
But I think as long as there's language in the Constitution somewhere that the General Assembly can provide by law for such a thing where they can do it because Henry's right. It would be a gratuitytype thing which we're state-prohibited from doing if we didn't have some sort of constitutional authorization. But I think it should be broad and this language ought never to have been--well, it had to be if we ,; wanted to do it. But I certainly don't think it ought to be part of the Constitution. MS. HAGER:
Does that take care of that? MR. HILL:
Okay. MR. NEEL:
It's a very active program although we don't have nearly as many people sixty-two years of age and older attending college as we thought we would. MR. GIGNILLIAT:
Last time I checked there was less than a hundred; it may have increased. DR. CRIM:
By the year 2000 they will exceed the number of children in school under age eighteen, in terms of the total population. MR. NEEL:
May I say, Madame Chairman, that Mr. Freeman asked me to express regret at not being able to attend this meeting. He had a longstanding vacation plan for this week but he wanted to attend and he asked me to express his regret in his ability to attend and to assure you and the other members of the committee that his absence toddy is not to be construed as a lack of interest on his part of anything that this committee is working on.
May I also say in conclusion that I know what you're going through. I served as chairman of a committe for seven years on criminal code, the criminal
procedure code. And we worked for seven long years.
We got the criminal code by but the procedural code
didn't last very long when it hit the General Assembly.
And I'm very sympathetic with what you are doing, what you have done and the work that you've put into
it and we appreciate it. Certainly the Board of Regents
does and I personally appreciate what you're doing
and I hope that your Constitution will meet with approval
by the General Assembly. I know it's disheartening to work as hard as you have on a document and as we
did on the procedural code and we had a good procedural
code. We just couldn't convince the General Assembly
of that.
MS. HAGER:
Thank you for coming very much. It helped us
i {, Z
out a lot. I guess the main thing then is this section
(b) that needs to be worked on.
MR. HILL:
We'll work on that.
MS. HAGER:
And you will send that to us and I guess if anyone
has any real objections to the wording, they should
contact your office? Has a date been set for the
full committee?
MR. HILL:
PAGE 69 No, no. You're the first subcommittee to complete your work. I think it will be the middle of September, the week of the 15th or the week of the 22nd of September before we reconvene the full committee. But we'll prepare a report from this committee with this draft and recommendations and a summary of what's transpired to the full committee and we'll send a copy of that to you so you can review it. And if there's an objection to the rewording of (b) you can let ue know and we'll handle it at the full committee meeting. MS. HAGER: All right. Thank all of you for coming. And we'll see you in September, then. [Whereupon, the above-entitled proceedings was adjourned at 3:15 o'clock, p.m.]
1
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on Aug. 12, 1980
1
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 8-12-80
Proceedings. pp. 2-7
SECTION IV: BOARD OF REGENTS Paragraph I: (a) Composition, appointment, etc. pp. 7-9
(b) Jurisdiction. pp. 9-44 (c) Appropriations. pp. 45-55 (d) Duties, etc. pp. 44-45, 55-57 (e) Acceptance of donations, etc. pp. 57-59 (f) Qualifications. pp. 59-63
SECTION VII: EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE Paragraph IV: Waiver of tuition. pp. 63-67
PAGE 1
2
STATE OF GEORGIA
3
COMMITTEE TO REVISE ARTICLE VIII
4
OF THE
5
CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA
6
7
8
9
10
"z
11 j:
'oG.".o.
@;i ! 14 II:-zIcI: 15 .: "'":;) 16 .~.. Q -Zc 17 :
SUBCOMMITTEE ON STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION AND STATE SCHOOL
SUPERINTENDENT
18
19
20
21 Room 40l-A State Capitol
22 Atlanta, Georgia
23 Monday, August 18, 1980 9:00 a.m.
24
25
PRESENT:
COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
CHAIRMAN CHARLES MEREDITH MIRIAM GRAHAM ODELL OWENS WILLIAM PRESSLY TOM VANN
ALSO PRESENT:
MELVIN B. HILL, JR. VICKIE GREENBERG
HARVEY FINDLEY
JENNYE GUY
PAGE 2
! ;~
PAGE 3
PRO C E E DIN G S
~. 'r
2
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think it is past the hour to
3 come to order.
4
I have a slight problem this morning. I have a
5 Board of Trustees meeting that I have to get back to at
6 around 10:00, and I have spoken to Mrs. Graham,
7 co~chairperson of this committee, and she has graciously
8 agreed to lead you through the rest of the agenda.
9
As far as I can tell, the only agenda item we have
10
1:1 Z
11 i..a0=..:..
12 a:
@rl
14 !
I-
-cIII
:I:
15 .:I
1a::1
;;)
16 .zC.D.
Q
17
-aZc:
CD
is to review the draft, the first working draft of Section I and Section II of Article VIII unless the staff has some comments relative to this document that you just passed out. Would you like to lead us through this?
MS. GREENBERG: All right. What I did on this memo dated August 18th was to provide for fifteen states, constitutional e~erpts of the State School Superintendent and State Board of Education, and I just randomly picked
18 fifteen states, and you'll notice as you briefly scan the
19 provisions that most of them either simply mention the State
20 Board of Education and State School Superintendent and provide
21 that their duties and qualifications shall be provided by
22 law. Very few of them will 11.s t specific duties and 23 qualifications except for possibly if you'll look at for 24 example Illinois, the Board may establish goals, determine 25 policies, provide for planning and evaluating of education
PAGE 4
programs and recommend financing, so it's in very broad genera]
2 terms, nothing specifically as far as prohibiting them from
?',:'
3 being a member of a school book publishing company or anything
4 like that.
5
In some of the states you'll notice there's no
6 provision at all for State Board of Education or State School
7 Superintendent, and therefore I would assume it's being left
8 to the discretion of the General Assembly in providing for it
9 by law.
:.~ '.";'
10 .,
MR.. HILL: Mr. Chairman, I was going to respond to
Z
11
i=
.'0."....
your request
the last
time for some information about
@r~~12 '" qualifications in other state constitutions, and I think that will become relevant when we get into Paragraph I, Section II.
14 ! t-
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: California has an interesting
O:-zcI:l
., 15 011 situation, right, where their superintendent is elected and
'";)
16 ...zIII he nominates the board. No, I'm sorry. I read that wrong.
-z~c
'" 17 III
Okay. Then why don't we just -- has everyone had a
18 chance to read the first working draft, and maybe we can
19 proceed with the first paragraph and see if the first
20 attempt to capture the many discussions we've had to date is
21 satisfactory.
22
MR. OWENS: When you said satisfactory, you had
23 reference to being satisfactory according to the motions
24 passed, or to the feeling of our --
25
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I think both. First of all,
PAGE 5
we should see if they're inclusive enough of the discussions
':'::
2 that we had, and if they seem to be adequate for us to
3 recommend adoption or modification as the committee sees fit.
4
I have a question on Paragraph I. I thought we
5 had arrived at a decision to indicate that that section would
6 read,-be titled --
7
MR.. HILL: Elementary and Secondary Education?
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Yes.
9
MR.. HILL: I went back through the actual transcript
\.:
10
"z
11 ~0c....r..:
12 cr:
@rl
14 !... ':"z: 15 .:
.".cr:
;;;)
16 .z.. D
..17 cZr:
of our minutes, and it was somewhat uncertain. At one point that seemed to be the agreement, but then there was some discussion as to whether this Paragraph I really applied more broadly than just primary and secondary education because public funds are expended for the support of other than just primary and secondary education, and so I felt we had not reached final agreement on the title of this, so it is up for discussion again.
18
We could entitle this Primary and Secondary
19 Education, Support by Taxation, and then just indicate the
20 same language as we have here.
21
DR. PRESSLY: I do feel that the State does
22 finance other education, higher education for instance, but
23 in Section II we're obviously dealing with elementary and
24 secondary all through when we start dealing with the State
25 Board of Education and the State Superintendent who is not
PAGE 6
in,.charge of the universities, so I really think this ought
!.:~
2 to be elementary and secondary.
~,~,
3
MR. HILL: Section I, of course, is the Section I
4 of the entire article, and then Section II is State Board of
5 Education; Section III is the Board of Regents -- well,
6 Section III is the State School Superintend,nt, but then
7 Section IV is the Board of Regents.
8
DR. PRESSLY: I see. And Section I is also over
9 the Board of Regents?
,,'.
10
'?5' zI.iI
11 ai=:
0A....
12 a:
@;I
! 14 ... ':~"r
15 011
Ia.i:I
::;)
16 I.z.I.I Cl Z
17 a~: III
MR. HILL: Yes. It's to some extent a policy statement.
DR. PRESSLY: I see. All right. MR. OWENS: The discussion that we had that made that change, I don't remember the exact change that we made in it, was the adult education aspect that~ brought in, and that's publicly financed, and that was the difference between the elementary and secoftdary education.
18
MR. VANN: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hill, the draft; would
19 seem to propose then to deal with all education in Georgia,
20 in other words whatever the State of Georgia might provide,
21 both primary, secondary, vocational, higher education.
22
MR. HILL: It appears to.
23
MR. VANN: In that respect, I have no objection to
24 this because I feel that this section deals with education,
25 however and whatever might be provided in Georgia, but I do
PAGE 7
have some concems that have come to my mind since I have
2 been reading the histories provided in this particular
3 document, and I have a concem about stating that the expense
4 of public education shallbe provided for by taxation if it
5 covers the whole gamut of education because at certain levels
6 it may be provided for by taxation and otherwise, and there
7 may be no intention to limit it to that by this constitutional
8 provision.
9
MR. OWENS: What's the otherwise you had in mind?
10
.."z
11 j:
.o.....
@;I
MR. VANN: In higher education, for instance, tuition, public funds that may come from sources other than Georgia taxation, contributions, gifts. I recognize the fact that in the second one with reference to the State Board of
14 ~I Education it would give them the power to accept bequests,
'".c(
:I:
.15 ~ donations, grants, transfers of land, buildings and other
"::I
16 .~.. property, and of course I expressed the view before, I had a
aaz
17 concem about -- you know, we were discussing equal educa-
18 tional opportunity. To me in my review of the constitution,
19 and I think you said to us there was no specific provision
20 that you were aware of providing for equal protection in so
21 many words in the constitution; is this correct?
22
MR. HILL: That's right, in the present constitution
23
MR. VANN: The closest I found to it would be the
24 section that dealt with paramount duty of government shall be
25 impartial and complete, the protection of person and property.
PAGE 8
MR. HILL: Yes.
2
MR. VANN: It seems to me like this is an odd
3 place to put a section with reference to equal protection
4 and that our constitution ought to contain an equal protection 5 provision, and it ought to be in Article I, Section I right
6 along with due process so that it permeates the entire
7 constitution and doesn't just seem to affect education.
8
I would like to read a proposal for consideration.
9
Paragraph I. Public Education, Free Prior to
10 College, Support by Taxation.
"z
11 ;::
The provision of an adequate public education for
"o"
"1M-
@.2j ~r14~!
the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of Georgia. Public education prior to the college or postsecondary level from the age of 5 through the age of 18 of
I-
~
4(
:r
15 ~ citizens shall be free. The expenses of public education
""";;)
16 ~ shall be provided for by taxation or otherwise.
1M
zQ
17 g
I realize that the 1945 constitution eliminated the
18 provision about free, but it had been contained in prior
19 constitutions, and I have always had a little bit of concern
20 about this.
21
I have never checked the law, but have the courts
22 held that the '45 constitution still means that the education
23 shall be free? Does the statement that education shall be 24 provided for by taxation mean the common schools shall be
25 free?
1
i
PAGE 9
It would seem to me like that you could well have
~ ~,;~
2 an interpretation that you could also charge tuition, any-
3 thing of this nature, and I have had some concern which I
4 haven't expressed before, but I think it is well for this
5 Paragraph I to deal with the obligation of the state to
6 provide an adequate public education for the citizens that
7 would be from --
8
MR.. OWENS: It still holds up under law that the
9 public schools cannot legally charge tuition of a nature, and
10 when it's done it has to be done rather surreptitiously.
I:J Z
11 j:
'0..".... 12 '"
@;I
For example, we charge a -- not charge, ask for a tuition for science supplies, but the letters are sent to the parents asking them for this, we collect it, but you cannot -- if
! 14 ~ ." ~ :I:
15 olI
I:J
'";;) 16 .zlD..
Q
Z
'" 17
~ lD
they don't pay it, you still cannot punish the child for not paying it.
Of course, I don't know if they're fully aware of the law, but we put it down in nice language so that we a1;'e
18 safe in case something comes up. This is required to improve
19 some of the science supplies and equipment, things that we
20 need that the state just doesn't afford.
21
I brought that up to say that so that indicates
22 there, and it has been proven, at least it's accepted in the
23 courts that we are not to charge tuition to students on a
24 mandatory basis.
25
MR.. VANN: Yes, I agree with you. I'm not sure
PAGE 10
whether this is based upon statute or the constitution.
2
MR. OwtNS: Or policy.
3
MR. VANN: Or policy. I mean the court decision.
4
I don't know why they ever eliminated free. There
5 must have been some reason for it, but as far as primary and 6 secondary education is concerned I think throughout most of
7 our constitutional history if not all of it it has been free
8 theoretically.
9
DR. PRESSLY; Tom, would you read your paragraPh
10 again? I got most of it, but not all of it.
"z
11 ~
..'o"....
MR. VANN: All right, sir.
@;i The first sentence is the same except there's an addition of one word, the provision of an adequate public
14 .~.. education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of
':~z":
15 olI the State of Georgia. The only addition there is the word
"'"::J
16 ~... "public" in between adequate and education .
Q
Z
17 g~
DR. PRESSLY: Yes, sir.
18
MR.. VANN: This is a new sentence: Public education
19 prior to the college or post-secondary level from the age of
20 5 through the age of 18 of citizens shall be free.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I just have a problem with the
22 age.
23
MR.. VANN: All right.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: There are some cases where
25 students, depending on local laws, may attend school before 5,
PAGE 11
or there may become cases where students may be allowed to
2 attend school before 5, and if we pin it down at 5 it might
3 not apply, if you're not 5 you have to pay.
4
MR.. VANN: The purpose of that was not that intent.
5 The purpose would be to assure that it would be free from the
6 age of 5 through the age of 18.
7
For instance, right now we don't have any age limit
8 except by statute, and of course
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It could be mandatory?
~::'
10
MR. VANN: It could be free by act of the legislature
..CzI
11 I- I assume for the ages above or below that, but it would be
..0....
..12 constitutional in that age group which currently -- I selected
@ r l it because in my judgment it covers kindergarten through 12th
14 ~ grade possibly.
I-
':"z:
.15 ~ CI
MR.. HILL:
Is there an advantage in stating it that
;;)
16 .Iz.I.I way as opposed to just stating that the primary and secondary
..Q
Z
17 III education for the citizens shall be free? Instead of
18 specifying all of the prior to and post, if you just said
19 primary and secondary, would that do the same thing?
, .."";
20
MR.. VANN: In other words., I don It know -- as far
21 as I'm concerned there's a question about the language of
22 primary, secondary, college or post-secondary, and I'm
23 assuming that this would enable the legislature to define
24 within certain limits what's meant by it, and therefore I
25 felt it necessary to add an age because maybe that's too
PAGE 12
strict, but we statutorily have provided for an age, and I
2 assume -- maybe it's well that the legislature could provide,
;I"~
3 still go back to providing that the age 7 through 16 would be
4 free, perhaps they should, but I don't feel like they should
5 have that authority.
6
I am trying to cover the gamut of what we currently
7 have free.
8
MR. OWENS: 18 I think is too young to cut off.
9 With the added materials they have for students these days
10 they're barely finishing at 18. If somebody fails a course
r'.~
11
%"
j:
and has to go another year, they run into extreme problems
.'.0"....
12 '" trying to really graduate before -- I mean at that age level.
@rl
Now with the 12th grade and the requirements they
! 14 ... have it doesn't give them any leverage for failing any courses
':"z:
15 olI or even being out or starting to school late or any kind of
"'~"
16
...til
%
thing that might deter them from graduating on time.
Cl
Z
'" 17 III
MR. VANN: I recognize what you're saying. I had
18 some concern about this, and I had thought about the age of
19 19 or some other age, and I wouldn't have any objection I
20 guess to increasing that age as long as we continue to express
21 it as prior to or some level below college or post-secondary.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Can you again give the rationale
23 for the age, the specific mention of the starting and ending
24 age?
25
MR. VANN: Well, the starting and ending age is not
PAGE 13
intended to express a starting and ending age, but an age
2 at which public education would be -- a point at which
3 public education prior to college or post-secondary level
4 would be free, and attaching ages to freedom prior to college
5 or post-secondary level.
6
You know, then it leaves it up to the General
7 Assembly as I see it, they could provide for free public
8 education at all ages, at college, secondary, post-secondary.
9 As a matter of fact, we basically have free public education
10
" 11
z
j:
or:
.f..
@;i
! 14 lo-n ":zil:
15 ol)
"or:
;;)
16 .~.. Q Z "il
17 ::
at the post-secondary vocational school level, but it would not be mandatory, it would be optional.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Mrs. Graham? MRS. GRAHAM: I think when you start listing ages you're going to run into a conflict because under Public Law 94.142 it specifically says the child will receive education from zero to 21 I believe under the law, and so as a State School Board member maybe you could address this
18 problem, I mean this area.
19
MR. VANN: I don't believe Public Law 94.142
20 requires you to furnish it at those ages. It does require
21 you to furnish it if you furnish it to any others at those
22 ages.
23
And besides, I would have to say to you that even
24 the constitution adopted by the citizens of Georgia would be
i
25 preempted by federal law which is, you know, the highest of
PAGE 14
priority in the United States, but Public Law 94.142 deals
),.-..;~:
:'::
2 with the education of the handicapped, and --
:~.lj
3
MRS. GRAHAM: Apparently I misread it or whatever,
4 but I have got a book this thick on the Public Law 94.142,
5 and I was just reading through there, and under certain
6 sections dealing with the handicapped child I was under the
7 impression that the parent did have the right to request that
8 the child receive special services from zero to 21, I mean
9 with hearings and so forth. Now, is that correct?
",
10
MR. VANN: I'm not certain that it provides this.
\~t
11
z"
j:
There possibly
is
a
definite position that
could be,. taken
.'.0"....
12 '" and a position that we've taken otherwise that it's provided
e r l for all children at the same age level if that's what the
14 !... state provides
VI
:r
15 011
MRS. GRAHAM; This book is two years old now that
"'";:)
16 ...zIIil I'm reading, so maybe the law has been changed.
0z
'" 17 ~ IIil
MR. VANN: I don't think it's been changed, but if
18 that becomes an obligation of the State of Georgia it would
19 become an obligation imposed by federal law.
20
DR. PRESSLY: What is gained by using the phrase
21 from the age of 5 to 18 at all when you have already said
22 prior to the college level?
23
MR. VANN: I guess I had concern when I said public
24 education prior to college or post-secondary level of citizens
25 shall be free, that's one possible way of putting it, but I
PAGE 15
had some concern of the ability to legislate less than
2 currently kindergarten through 12th grade.
3
DR. PRESSLY: Would you object to putting the word -
4
MR. VANN: I recognize it doesn't limit them. You
5 know, you don't have to call something kindergarten through
6 the 12th grade or --
7
DR. PRESSLY: Would you object to putting "usually"
8 before the "from," so that if a child is 19 or 20 and is still
9 in high school nobody is going to object? If you say usually
10 from the age of 5 to 18, then no one could object if someone
"z
11 j:
..'o.."..
@;I
does bump into difficulty as you're pointing out and he's there until he's 20 or she's 20, and you'll be covered.
MR. VANN: I guess what I was trying to do was to
14 ~ express that which was currently being done in Georgia, not
l;;
::I:
15 olI requiring a free education under age 5 by the constitution
"'";;)
16 .~.. because it wasn't currently being done .
aoz
17
DR. PRESSLY: Yes.
18
MR. VANN: I h~ve problems with the age of 18, you
19 know, likewise, because the object of it is to afford a free
20 -- as Melvin expresses it, a primary and secondary education.
21
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Why don't we say K through l2?
22
MR. VANN: Well, because --
23
MR. HILL: They may change their numbers. You see,
24 that's our problem if we have a specificity of that type. I
25 doubt if that will happen in the near future, but we're trying
PAGE 16
to draft something that will last us for fifty or a hundred
2 years, so the broader the language the better.
3
I think we can say that-with some assurance we will
4 always have primary and secondary education.
5
MR. VANN: If you include by primary kindergarten --
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: That's no more than kindergarten
7 through 12, it's the same difference. In order to change K
8 through 12 you 're probably going to change the definition of
9 primary and secondary.
10
MR. VANN: I guess what he's saying is you could
..15
11
Z
i=
change nomenclature and still have the same type of education,
.oG.o.
@;i or you could change it where you were teaching or where you were providing education from what was traditionally K through
! 14 3 all as one unit, not just K, 1, 2, 3.
l;;
:-zc: 15 ~
You know, the age is something that I' felt expressed
1or5:
:;)
16 .~.. what was currently being done; however, the maximum age is not
zQ
17 g necessarily there change the language prior to the college or
18 post-secondary level, but I think there should be some
19 maximum age at which it becomes not a free public education
20 if it was so provided by the legislature.
21
Now, you know, adult education is being provided
22 free, vocational education in a respect in being provided
23 free, and about the only non-free education in the state of
24 Georgia, and it's being supported to a large quantity by
25 taxation, is higher education, college and university level.
PAGE 17
The thought of it is to have some age limit that
2 doesn't you know, you could put 25, but I don't believe we
3 would want that. I think I'm trying to get more to a point at
4 which we are now performing.
5
I guess I'm saying that's the minimum, if we were no
6 performing at that minimum
7
MR. HILL: Let's look at someone in the adult
8 education program which we talked about last time. Let's say
9 a person is 40 or 50 and would like to have a diploma, they
10 only went through the ninth grade or tenth grade. If we
11 "z~ draft the language more broadly than this and then have an age
9-1.o..... 12 " limitation in there. I think the state under this language
would be obligated to provide that 40-year-old with a free
14 ~ education until they had achieved -- until they graduated from
'"
~
15 .:I a hig1\. school program. Maybe that's a good public policy in
"";;;)
16 ~ itself. but I think that's what you would be doing is Q z
17 ~ authorizing that or allowing the General Assembly to authorize
18 that.
19
Again, we have to remember that this is j~st the
20 basic minimum and the General Assembly could exceed it.
21
MR. VANN: Always?
22
MR. OWENS: There was one point I dido't think
23 about--
24
MR. VANN: The one point is -- Excuse me, Mr.
25 Owens. Go ahead.
PAGE 18
MR.. OWENS: When you brought it up, when you said
2 elementary and secondary, well, the adult education program
3 basically covers elementary and secondary, so the word
4 elementary and secondary would not have been out of place,
5 I thought about that afterwards, because most of the adult
6 programs that you have teaching them elementary studies and
7 high school studies, trying to finish high sthool or GED,
8 et cetera
9
MR.. HILL: Are they free now, those programs?
10
MR.. OWENS: They are. I don't know about all
"z
11 j: aI:
sections.
They are everywhere I am, the vocational programs.
2
III
Q~J;I They have had to pay for the examination, the GED test, but
basically the program itself is free.
14!......
DR. PRESSLY: Let me ask this question. Can a
~
15 olI 40-year-old now take high school work without charge?
"aI:
:;)
16 ~ III
MR.. OWENS: Yes. They can take it in the adult
zQ
17 a education programs, it's a special program set up. They
18 cannot attend high school, you know, the regular daily high
19 school.
20
DR. PRESSLY: They can take the equivalency?
21
MR. OWENS: They do have a provision set up for I
22 imagine
23
MR.. VANN: Theoretically I suppose, and I'm subject
24 to correction on this, but theoretically I don't think there
25 is any policy that would prohibit a local school system from
..... '.~ .. ':.~
PAGE 19
admitting someone irregardless of his age to secondary or
2 elementary education, but they might be able to charge him
3 tuition beyond age 19, and so there is an adult education
4 program provided.
5
DR. PRESSLY: Is it free?
6
MR. VANN: Yes, sir.
7
DR. PRESSLY: Then I don't see any reason for age
8 limits.
9
MR. VANN: Let me say this to you, that not all
10 school systems may have an adult education program.
11 5"z
DR. PRESSLY: I know that.
.o.....
~~;I14! CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. I think there's not uninimity on that, whether or not there should be a specific I.-:.zc-.: age clause in there. I think if we could resolve that we
15 ~ might be, closer to adopting the language.
"Ill:
:;)
16 .~..
MR. VANN: I think the statute right now says 19 .
zQ
17 ~ I believe that's correct.
18
MR. HILL: Harvey, do you have any feelings about
19 this?
20
This is Harvey Findley with the Office of LegislativE
21 Counsel who is involved in a lot of drafting of statutes and
22 whatnot.
23
MR. FINDLEY: I see Mr. Vann' s point. I believe he' E
24 trying to establish a matter of fundamental law, your idea if
25 I could presume to interpret it,- that citizens should have a
PAGE 20
right to a free education between what amounts to elementary
2 and post-secondary, you want to establish that as a fundamental
3 public policy expressed in the constitution, but not limit the
4 General Assembly to go beyond that.
5
The problem I would raise, Mr. Hill, is that as you
6 express that education is free for primary and secondary,
7 then it could possibly be construed as necessitating that
8 there be some charge for education -- in other words, bind
9 the General Assembly to charge for public education beyond
10 primary and secondary which is of course what we do, but do we
I:J
Z
11 j:;
.'o"".-.
@;I
as a matter of fundamental law want to have a connotation, and we may, that the General Assembly wouldn't have the flexibility to provide free education say through junior
! 14 ~
college level as has been done out in California I believe.
':"z:
15 ~
While that may be not realistic right now in 1980,
I:J
'":;)
16 ~... we can't afford to do it and a lot of other reasons, but do we
zQ
17 : as a matter of fundamental policy, public policy want to
18 preclude that.
19
In other words, the point that you -- I see your
20 intention that you want to as a matter of fundamental public
21 policy that education has to be free, which seems to me all
22 things being equal if it could be expressed properly would be
23 desirable.
24
On the other hand --
25
MR. VANN: May I read you a first draft that I had
PAGE 21
and ask you about this?
2
The provision of an adequate public education for
3 the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of
4 Georgia. Public education prior to the college or post-
s secondary level from the age of 5 through the age of 18 of
6 citizens shall be free, the expense of which shall be provided
7 for by taxation. The expenses of other public education shall
8 be provided for from public funds, including those derived
9 from taxation, tuition, contribution and gift, or otherwise.
10
MR. FINDLEY: That more successfully addresses the
concern that I have. If you can figure out some way to
express it as a matter of constitutional principle, funda-
mental public policy that education shall be free for what we all think of as the public school level, whatever that may be, from three years old to 25, but then the state would have
the flexibility to either be free or charge for any other
public education, and as I understood that's what you wanted
18 to say, but I'm wondering if it would say that.
19
MR. VANN: The reason I eliminated that Will the
20 reason I thought that what I finally came up to said this,
21 but the other I guess is specific about it.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Couldn't we add something about
23 free for elementary and secondary or some language like that,
24 period. The cost for public education beyond that shall be
2S provided by law, which could be from zero up to whatever it
PAGE 22
is.
2
MR. VANN: I thought the 1969 or '64 constitution
3 that had two sections, one of them dealing with public
4 education below the college level, and one of them dealing
5 with public education above the college level had some merit,
6 because as we deal with education the way it reads now there
7 are some -- except for the regents section and except for
8 this change you put here, it just dealt apparently with
9 common schools possibly, and I was trying to provide in one
10 a continuation of adequate, but I was making it -- I was using
the word public which is what I think we all intend.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Mrs. Graham, do you have a
cODmlent?
MRS. GRAHAM: I wanted to say that since it's our
duty to come up with a working draft to submit, that if we
were to go back to the constitution and read Section I,
Public Education, Paragraph I, that it says that it all. 18 You may want to add a few words there, but that is basically
19 saying what you're saying, free tuition, the provision of an
20 adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary
21 obligation of the state of Georgia, the expenses of which 22 shall be provided by taxation, and I know your concern is
23 where we're going to stop, but then, let's face it, those
24 who are in the General Assembly will -- I mean they're going
25 to do what they so choose to do based on what the people of
PAGE 23
Georgia more or less want.
2
Are we really just going in circles here is my
3 question?
4
MR. HILL; I don't feel you're going in circles
5 because I think there is some question under this language
6 as to whether a free tuition must be provided. It is
7 provided under the present circumstances, but the language
8 there is not crystal clear that the provision of a primary
9 and secondary education shall be free to the citizens, and so
10 to clarify that and make it so that no one is confused you
I!I
Z
11
~
..'o"....
might want to add just those words.
9;1 I think perhaps we are circling what language to use but there are about two or three things we have to decide.
14 ~ I don't know if we can do a good job of drafting this at this I'" :I:
15 olI table. I would hope that we could with Harvey's assistance I!I '";;)
16 .~.. and more attention to this particular provision now that we
cz
17 : could go back and redo it based on your specific direction,
18 what you want to have included, and then come back for one mor.
19 meeting of the subcommittee rather than try to do this this
20 morning.
21
It's important we get a good draft to present to the
22 full committee, and the question is whether we want to have thE
23 age or not.
,
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH; What I was going to do is ask
25 Mr. Vann to sort of summarize for the record specifically
PAGE 24
what should be contained in this article and have you do just.
2 as you suggested, kind of draft it.
3
DR. PRESSLY: Charles, wouldn't a motion help a
4 little bit before the drafting, because we have had quite a
5 little discussion here of whether or not we wanted to say
6 anything beyObd the college and post-secondary level. It
7 seems to me we might get the feeling of the majority before
8 they actually do it. Do you think that would be a good idea?
9
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Do you want to put one?
10
DR. PRESSLY: I would like to move that we accept
Mr. Vann's recommendation, removing only the words "from the
age of 5 to 18."
In other words, it would read that the provision of
an adequate public education for the citizens shall be a
primary obligation of the State of Georgia. Public education
prior to the college or post-secondary level for the citizens
shall be free. The expense of public education shall be
18 provided by -- for by taxation or otherwise.
19
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. We have a motion from Dr.
20 Pressly that we use the statement just read as the basis for
21 the final draft of Paragraph I.
22
Is there a second to the motion?
23
MR. OWENS: I second it.
24
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's properly moved and seconded
25 that the language serve as a basis for Paragraph I. Would
PAGE 25
anyone like to speak to the motion?
2
MR. HILL: This doesn't take into account Mr.
3 Findley's observation that to just stop right there might
4 leave the General Assembly in the position of not being allowei
5 to provide free tuition beyond that, so would you object to an
6 additional sentence to specify similar to the way you've done
7 in your second sentence of your first draft that beyond that
8 point they can do it?
9
MR. VANN: Dr. Pressly, I would like to make a
10 substitute motion and ask you your thoughts on it.
11 S"z
I would like to move that the staff draft a provisiol
o
A-
@) - I12 ~ incorporating the theories contained"in the following language:
14 ~
The provision of an adequate public education for
!;;
:z:
15 olJ the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of
"..:
~
16 ~ Georgia. Public education prior to the college or post-
az
17 : secondary level for the citizens shall be free, the expenses
18 of which shall be provided for by taxation. The expense of
19 other public education shallbe provided for from public funds
20 including those derived from taxation, tuition, contributions
21 and gifts, or otherwise.
22
DR, PRESSLY: That suits me fine.
23
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: You're going to withdraw your
24 motion?
25
DR. PRESSLY: I withdraw my motion. I like that.
PAGE 26
MR. VANN: Do you want to --
2
MR. OWENS: I second that. You did the same thtilg
3 and extended it a little bit.
4
DR. PRESSLY: That's right.
5
MR. VANN: That expressed the sense of what we said,
6 the theory.
7
DR. PRESSLY: That's fine.
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Can we pass that by comnon
9 consent, or do we need to take a vote?
10
Mrs. Graham?
MRS. GRAHAM: That 's fine with me.
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay.
It's getting close to ten o'clock. Dr. Pressly
suggested I may need to stay through part of Section II.
MR. HILL: Mr. Chairman, could I ask one further
question on Paragraph I? In terms of this provision that no
citizen shall be denied equal protection of the law, is it
18 the consensus of the subcommittee that this should be a
19 recomnendation to the Select Committee that this language
20 should be in Article I and relate across the board and not
21 be in this?
22
MR. VANN: That's my thought, it should permeate the
23 entire constitution.
24
MR. HILL: This was a compromise the last time, and
25 at your suggestion --
PAGE 27
MR. VANN: It was at my suggestion, but I didn't
2 even like it then,
3
MR. HILL: -- to try to address the equal educa-
4 tional opportunity issue.
5
MR. VANN: In this section.
6
MR. HILL: Is that issue to be left un--
7
MR. VANN: It would be my judgment that if the
8 constitution generally provides this that it would be reached
9 by the same section in the general part of the constitution
10 if it meets this problem of equal educational opportunity and
11
"z
j:
oc..>..=..
would meet it better there from a constitutional viewpoint
@;I than in this section. CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Is that feeling shared by the
! 14 comnittee?
In
<l(
:I:
15 ~
MR. OWENS: I feel that what he said implied that --
"c>=
::>
16 ~... is it implied enough to stand up in court, this provision of
zQ
17 : equal opportunity or protection by law? Isn't that implied
18 in what you stated?
19
MR. VANN; Of course, I'm not certain that the
20 dictionary language of adequate says it means equal, but it
21 says that meaning has become obsolete, and it generally now
22 means something less I guess than that, but what I am saying,
23 Mr. Owens, is that I don't feel like -- I understand the
24 sense of everyone, and I had really forgotten that our
25 constitution didn't contain any provision about equal
PAGE 28
protection of the law, and I really feel like that our
2 constitution ought to contain a provision about equal
3 protection of the law, but I don't think it ought to relate
4 to education alone, and I think it ought to relate to all
5 phases of the Georgia constitution including education, and
6 if it's placed in Section I, Rights of Citizens, that it then
7 becomes a statement -- and by the way, it says no person shall
8 be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process
9 of law in the very first section, and I'm suggesting that the
10 same section or one very akin to it now be provided that says
no person shall be denied the equal protection of the law,
and that this governs our whole constitution.
I am not so certain that placing it in the education
section will do that, will@pvern the whole constitution. I
really don't see why we should say that, I mean in the field
of education a citizen should not be denied the equal protec-
tion of the law and permit in other sections of the constituticn
18 not to say it.
19
. JJR. PRESSLY: In other words, we're not throwing it
20 out in the sense of tossing it aside, but we're putting it
21 where it would have broader reference.
22
MR. VANN: I would like to recommend that we
23 recommend that --
24
MR. OWENS: If we leave' it heTe and somewhere else
25 would it be just added impetus rather than a negative form
PAGE 29
of redundance?
2
MR. VANN: I don't really know. I think if it's in
3 the general portion of the constitution that this will not add
4 any legal meaning.
5
MR. OWENS: You know, some of the court cases that
6 have been dealing with -- we found, I don't know whether it
7 was in the other part of the constitution or in some of the
8 other states, but it was not an educational division of the
9 constitution and they had problems with it, so it needs to be
10
.."z
11 j:
..o....
@);~i ! 14 ... '<"l :I: 15 ~ ~ ::I 16 ~... Q Z <l 17 :
somewhere, and I'm wondering whether if we have the added or the necessary force or impetus if it were not here.
What would be against -- I'm trying to find Why would you -- You said you were not against the idea, but you do have some problems wi~h the, with it being here and somewhere else, or that it just only applies to this by being in this section .
If it were somewhere else what would be the problem,
18 or if it were just here only what would be the problem?
19
MR. VANN: I suppose just that there would be no
20 necessity to express it here if it's expressed elsewhere.
21
If it's not expressed elsewhere, then I might
22 consider it, although you realize I felt that we should not
23 express in the constitution something stating like equal 24 educational opportunity unless we sat down and had some
25 understanding about what we were talking about, because I
PAGE 30
think what we're largely concerned with is the provision of 2 dollars.
3
MR. OWENS: The statement that's in the copy we
4 have, no citizen shall be denied the equal opportuni~y -- the
5 protection rather of the law, which is a simple statement, it
6 covers it. I think it satisfies it.
7
If that could be placed in some kind of --
8
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's your view it should be
9 here as well as elsewhere?
10
MR. OWENS: I feel it should be here as well as
"z
11 j:
Io..l..l..:
@;i
any other place it might be, and I just feel that it just adds to that section as well as to the constitution.
When you're looking for these things and writing,
! 14 ... working with it, sometimes you're dealing with just that ." ~ :t
15 01) section, and if you don't know the full constitution -- and ~ ::J
16 .~.. that is a difficult thing to know -- you don't pick it up as
az10
17 readily, and sometimes you don't get the full feel of what
18 it's all about.
19
DR. PRESSLY: Odell, wouldn~ you possibly buy this
20 idea that unless it is put in a place that applies to all
21 phases of life in Georgia you want it kept here?
22
MR. OWENS: Yeah, that's the idea.
23
DR. PRESSLY: I would buy that, unless it's put ther4
24 we want it here. If it's put there, we don't need it here, bU1
25 unless it's put there we want it ~e.
PAGE 31
MR. OWENS: And since you had the staff in your 2 motion to do this drafting, and we have already passed that 3 by common consent, it would be that this would be provided 4 so that it could be covered in the constitution or in this
5 area.
6
DR. PRESSLY: One or the other.
7
MR. OWENS: If it's not ~-
8
MR. HILL: There's a couple of things I would like tc~
9 say about it now.
10
The language that we now have that the protection of
11
"z
j:
person and property is paramount duty of government and shall
..'o."...
@;i be impartial and complete, which is the present language we have in Article I, has been construed as our equal protection
14 ~ clause, and it has exactly the same force and effect in
I-
':"c
15 Q
Georgia as an equal protection clause woua:.d have, number one.
"'"::;)
16 .~..
Number two, the committee to revise Article I
Qz
17 a proposed the language that no person shall be denied the
18 equal protection of laws as being included in Article I.
19
However, it also went on to propose that that
20 specify that equal protection shall not be denied on the basis
21 of race, sex, religion, national origin, et cetera, and the
22 issue of sex of course was what caused the Senate to spend an
23 entire day arguing on that one sentence because of the ERA,
24 so that what I'm saying is that while the Article I committee 25 has recommended that an equal protection clause be included,
PAGE 32
but because of the controversial nature of it I'm not real
2 sure what's going to happen to it, so I can't tell you with
3 certainty that that language that's in the present constitutio~
4 or that's in the proposed constitution will be there, sounder
5
those circ~tances --
6
DR. PRESSLY: When this takes final form, will you
7 then know?
8
MR. HILL: Well, that --
9
DR. PRESSLY: You don't know which comes first?
10
" II
% j:
.'o.."...
@;I
! 14 I..-. ~ %
15 olI
"~ '"
16 ~...
zQ
17 ~
MR.. VANN: You're saying, though, our courts have said that we have an equal protection clause.
MR.. HILL: Yes, that's right. MR. VANN: In other words, maybe they haven't categorically said it, but I'm assuming we would say that I think the Supreme Court of the United States said that the right to an education is a property right . MR. HILL: Yes.
18
MR.. VANN: Otherwise it wouldn't be covered under
19 that section.
20
You know, protection of person and property --
21
MR. HILL: I'm sorry, I can't say that the court
22 has in fact determined that the right to an..-education is a
23 property righ t .
24
DR.PRESSLY: The truth of the matter is, if we leave
25 it here we've done nothing except take a chance later on
PAGE 33
of having a redundancy, a sentence that we don't even need.
2 That's the worst we've done, isn't it?
3
MR. OWENS: That!s right.
4
MR. HILL: Yes.
5
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: On the other hand, it would
6 provide for --
7
DR. PRESSLY: I move, then, we leave it as it is.
8
MR. HILL: Leave it in the paragraph as the last
9 sentence?
10
I!l Z
11 i=
"..o....
@;i 14 .~.. ':z": 15 ~ I!l ";:) 16 .~.. oz 17 :
DR. PRESSLY: Yes. The next time this thing is revised twenty years down the road they'll say "Those fools didn't know how to handle the law, they just repeated themselves." Let them say it, We're not surethat it's going to be in the other place, if I understand~at you're saying .
MR. HILL: It's also the recommendation of this committee that if this language is included in Article I that it should be deleted from this one?
18
DR. PRESSLY: Right.
19
MR, OWENS: If it covers the whole constitution.
20
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Your statement saying that
21 Article I may not survive with this language
22
MR. VANN: In its present posture which had in it --
23 In other words, :ff that were Eliminated it probably would, the
24 provision about sex.
25
MR. HILL: Yes, that's right.
PAGE 34
MR.. VANN: Frankly, I never have understood why it
2 was necessary to put that language -- you know, I figure men
3 and women are all citizens and persons entitled to equal
4 protection of the law, and apparently there must be solely
5 on the basis that it would be reasonable to classify people
6 for equal protection as men or women. I expect our courts
7 might be moving away from that.
8
Also what you're saying I have no objection to, but
9 does it have a larger meaning when it's contained here and
10 sald here with reference to the other parts of the constitutior?
III
Z
e;i11 j: ~......
MR.. HILL:
had it both --
MR. VANN:
In other words, if it's repeated, if you No, if it's here and not anywhere in the
! 14 .I.-. constitution.
:"lr:
..15 ~ III
MR. HILL: I doubt if--it would be read that
:::l
16 z~.a.. broadly then. I feel if it's here and it's nowhere else it
17 ~ would be read strictly on education.
18
It will be tDmewhere else in some form.
19
DR. PRESSLY: We'll have to have it . somewhere surely
20
MR.. OWENS: Do you still have your motion?
21
I second it.
22
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: Okay. It's been moved and
23 seconded that we leave it as is. Is that what your motion 24 is?
25
DR. PRESSLY: With the provision if later on it
PAGE 35
becomes -- it has a broader implication and is placed where
2 it covers everything then it may be removed, but we want to he
3 sure that it's there before we take it out of here.
4
MR. VANN: Mr. Findley had a statement.
5
MR. FINDLEY: There's a couple of things. I think
6 on the education as a property right the Supreme Court has so
7 held in the suspension cases where they established the role,
8 .... 9
they're entitled to due process before you could suspend a child from public school, full blown due process when the
10
CzJ 11 ~
2 12 ~
@F~ 14 >" !:;z;: 15 olI .C.J: ::I 16 .~.. cz 17 ::
suspension is over ten days, and minimal due process when the suspension is less than ten days. In so reasoning they established the right to education as a property right in that context.
Here it seems to me I don't know whether your intention, not having been in on the earlier decision, I mean discussions of the subcommittee" but if an equal protection clause is stated here in the education article, then it seems
18 to me that there would be a real possibility that the court
19 would be forced to reach the conclusion like the Serano
20 decision in Californ~a -- now maybe that's your intention,
21 and if that's your intention fine, but I think that implica-
22 tion ought to te, if that is the intention that ought to be
23 analyzed so that you're deciding to do that from a policy
24 standpoint, and if you are deciding to do that from a policy
25 standIiont then it ought to be stated better, and you would
pAGE 36
cross reference over to the local taxation provisions of the.
2 constitution, but the Serano type reasoning indicated as you
3 know in California that the expenditures for public education
4 couldn't vary from one school district to another, ~nd the
5 Supreme Court of the United States would not so hold when the
6 Texas case went up there and establish a reasonable -- as long
7 as there is a reasonable basis for the financial system of the
8 state that it must run to the federal constitution.
9
But an .~ua1 protection clause here seems to me in
10 this context would almost put a compelling interest test to
e;i11
z"
j:
.o~ .....
any differentation between public finance for education from
one school system to another. In other words, it's all sorts
of implications I think in stating an equal protection clause
! 14 ...... here, because in the broader provision of the constitution ~ :I:
15 ol) where we have an equal protection clause as construed, as Mel
"~
;;)
16 .~.. points out, and that's not going to drop out -- it may get
zQ
17 : you may not get the sex thing because of the little ERA and tke
18 argument about it, but the equal protection clause is not
19 going to drop out of the constitution, so this wi1l'be an
20 additional equal protection clause in the education article.
21
To me, the implications of that are substantial.
22
MR. VANN: I agree with you, and I would like to
23 remove this mention in the constitution. Of course, frankly
24 in my judgment it would wind up the lawsuit against the State
75 of Georgia without any type of judidal determination on it at
PAGE 37
all.
2
MR. FINDLEY: Yes, sir, the suit up in north Georgia
3 in Whitfield County?
4
MR.~: Yes, and would place the State of Georgia
5 in a situation as you stated of --
6
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: I'm going to have to leaV'e.
7 Mrs. Graham is going to preside.
8
I'm going to leave my proxy with Dr. Pressly, I
9 think we're going to need to vote some place down the road.
10
MR, HILL: Based on what Harvey just'1la1d, do you
I!I
Z
11
j:
o.~..
feel that
@r l12 :
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: It's my recommendation we ought
to take it out if it's going to have the implication as
14
~
I-
indicated,
because we don't want that.
'<"l
X
15 .:
DR. PRESSLY: We did not intend that.
I!I
~
::>
16 .~..
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: We dd not intend that, and
IzII
17 ~ but I think the recommendation fromthis committee should state
18 that we are concerned that the equal protection clause,
19 wherever it is, will be such to protect the integri~ of
20 Paragraph I.
21
MR. OWENS: Now, you're recommending it be taken out
22 even though it may not be in another section?
23
MR. HILL: Some equal protection clause will be in
24 another section.
25
DR, PRESSLY: It is in another section they're
PAGE 38
saying.
2
MR. OWENS: You're saying it was having some trouble
3 and possibly it will not be --
4
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: What I understood, that sentence
5 said no person shall be denied equal protection on the basis
6 of race, sex, national origin, et cetera.
7
MR. HILL: The delineation of the grounds upon which
8 equal protection must be provided will perhaps not be included
9 ehe specificity, but some equal protection language will be in
10 We will not pass a new constitution without a provision of thai
"z
II j:
.Io.l..l..:
@;~
kind in there, I can assure you. MR. OWENS: With the idea of the fact that we are
stating this as a means of being sure that it's somewhere
14
!
$
else,
and if it
is
somewhere else you're saying
this
can be
:z:
" 15 olI deleted? Ill: ~
16 .~..
CHAIRMAN MEREDITH: All we're saying now is whether
zQ
17 a it's some place else or not, that it be deleted.
18
MR.VANN: I think we're also saying it's not our
19 intent to --'at least it's not my intent to express an opinion
20 as to whether that requires the type of fundingthat Mr.
21 Findley is talking about.
22
The question of what it requires is still a
23 judicial question.
24
MS. GREENBERG: If we delete this provision, we are
25 really not addressing the problem we've been discussing and
PAGE 39
trying to alleviate which is to in reality create equal
2 educational opportunities without saying it, because we're
3 afraid to say it, so we use this instead of equal educational
4 opportunity, and now we're afraid to say this.
5
The fact is we do have an equal protection clause,
6 at least it's been interpreted -- it's not doing the job
7 presently, and that's why apparently there are lawsuits in
8 various counties, there's a wide variance of funding for
9 educational purposes throughout the state, but the fact is
10
"z
11 I-
.'o"..
~
II'
12 ~
~r~ ! 14
I-
III
<:zl:
15 ,l)
"'";:)
16 ~ II' 1:1 Z <l
17 :
from the distribution of, I think it was this.coDDllittee, showing that the per student expenditures have a wide variance, and there are facts to show that the students are not getting an adequate education in certain counties, not even close to what the students in the richer counties are getting, so if this is not good language there should be something that will at least come close to our goal of asserting the rights of citizens to an adequate education.
18 If we don't do it here, I don't think that equal protection
19 clause that's presently in the constitution is going to do it.
20
MR. FINDLEY: That's what I was worried about, I
21 mean I commented as to the intention. If the intention is to
22 put in a clause that would mandate substantially equal
23 expenditures, per student expenditures from school systems
24 in other words, mandate funding the DPE provis ions of APEG,
25 it's been sitting there since 1974, but the General Assembly
PAGE 40
has never got up any money for it.
2
If the constitutional provision that would require
3 say funding that or some other provision to provide 4 substantially equal educational opportunities among school
5 districts is the intention, then I think this language has
6 the implications of that.
7
MR. VANN: I do too.
8
MR. FINDLEY: And would probably be so construed.
9
DR. PRESSLY: I don't think we're trying to say that
10 we have got to have the same amount of money spent in every
"z
11 j::
..o0..1..:
@;i
county of the state, that's not what we're talking about in my opinion when we want to keep this, so I still come back I think to the sentence better go out and rely on the fact that
14
~ .I:.z-.:
15 .:J
is the intent. MR. HILL':
And you would prefer as a committee
"01:
::>
16 ~...
to leave it to judicial construction about the extent to
Q
Z 17 :
which the state must refinance or reorganize its financing
18 system to meet this obligation and not try to address it as
19 a committee?
20
DR. PRESSLY: Right.
21
MR. HILL: That's your general agreement.
22
(Chairman Meredith withdrew
23
from the meeting.)
24
MRS. GRAHAM: Since Dr. Meredith has had to leave,
25 I would like to ask the subcomnittee at this point if you
PAGE 41
would like to take about a ten to fifteen-minute break. Is
2 that okay with each one of you?
3
MR. OWENS: I have no problems with it.
4
MRS. GRAHAM: Would you like a ten-minute break,
5 or fifteen?
6
MR. OWENS: Ten minutes will be sufficient to me.
7
DR. PRESSLY: I don't need any, I'm happy, but I'll
8 be happy to wait.
9
MRS. GRAHAM: Let's take a short break, and we will
10 come back in ten mf.nutes .
"z
11 i=
..'o"....
(A brief recess.)
@;I MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. While we're waiting for Odell, and just informally, Dr. Pressly, since I was not here at the
14 ~ last meeting and you are the alternate vice-chairman of this Ii; :r
15 olI special committee, would you like to just to through this
"'";;;)
16 ~... Section II and III and point out any specific thoughts that Q Z
17 : you recall from that discussion, even though Vickie and the
18 staff were nice enough to mail us copies of Dr. McDaniel's
19 comments and so forth.
20
DR. PRESSLY: I think that they did a very good job
21 of putting down the concepts that we had.
22
We had no desire whatsoever to change the method of
23 selecting the State Board of Education, and that stayed just
24 as we have it.
25
I think that -- I was trying to look at (a), (b),
PAGE 42
(c), (d).
2
The (b) one, the State Board of Education shall
3 have such powers and duties as provided by law, we agreed.
4
The State Board of Education shall establish minimum
5 educational standards and may adopt rules and regulations to
6 ensure that an adequate education for the citizens is
7 provided;
8
The State Board of Education,' shall see that
9 adequate vocational-technical education is provided;
10
"z
11 i= Ill: .2..
(~G/ ., ~~ 14i~ Ii; % 15 olI "Ill: ::lI 16 .~.. Qz 17 ~
The State Board may accept bequests, donations, grants and transfers of land, buildings, and other property for use of the State Department of Education;
Except as herein provided, the qualifications, compensation, removal from office, and powers and duties of the members of the Board of Education shall be as provided by law
I see nothing there that varies at all from our
18 discussions. Tom, you're about the only one I can -- Yes?
19
MR. HILL: I did want to make a couple of points
20 about why we omitted some of the language frOJl; the present
21 constitution with respect to the establishment of' the Board
22 of Education and filling of vacancies.
23
There is a provision that is going to be included
24 in Article V relating to the power of the Governor which
25 states that when any public office shall be come vacant by
PAGE 43
death, resignation or otherwise, the Governor shall promptly
2 fill such vacancy unless otherwise provided by this
3 constitution or by law.
4
Now, what the effect of that provision in Article V
5 will be is to give the Governor the right to fill a vacancy
6 unless otherwise provided by law, and in this case with the
7 State Board of Education the Board is presently authorized by
8 law to fill its own vacancies prior to -- if there should be
9 a vacancy between the time of the General Assembly is in
10 session, then the Board may fill that vacancy, and at the next
III
..Z
11 ~
..o....
@;~
session the Governor appoints someone to fill the vacancy for the unexpired term, and because that's a provision that is now in the law, I have a copy of the law here so you can see it,
! 14 I didn't feel the need to include it in the constitution, the
I-
..15
':z":
.:J
provision about the filling of that vacancy,
so that is one
III
~
16 .~.. thing . az
17 :i
Another thing, we had talked about whether or not
18 we should have a specific provision stating that no person
19 who is or has been connected with or employed by a school
20 book publishing concern shall be eligible for membership on
21 the Board, whether you should have such a specific statement
22 as that continue, and the feeling was we should broaden that
23 to state that no person with a conflict of interest shall be
24 appointed and allow the General Assembly to define what a
25 conflict of interest is.
PAGE 44
The present limitation on appointment of a person
2 who is a member of a book publishing concern is in the law,
3 so it would already be covered, and so it would not have to
4 be included here either. That is why we just have a broad
5 statement that no person whose appointment would create a
6 conflict of interest for such person --
7
DR. PRESSLY: I like that myself very much better,
8 it's broader.
9
Yes, Tom.
10
MRS. GRAHAM: Do you have any other comnents?
"z
11 j:
.~.....
DR. PRESSLY: No.
~ 12 ~
MRS. GRAHAM: We are back in session again for the
~ri! record, and I'm sorry that Dr. Meredith had to leave because 14 I really did not realize again that he had a conflict this
l-
UI
%
15 oll morning, but we will proceed.
"llI:
;)
16 ~...
We do need to for the record clear up this matter of
azQ
17 the equal rights in regard to race, sex, and so forth, and
18 Mel had suggested that we may want to delete I mean we
19 want to take a vote on whether or not we want to delete the
20 one last sentence.
21
Mel, would you be more specific and re-read the
22 sentence for the record?
23
MR. HILL: Yes, Mrs. Graham. The committee seemed
24 to be moving toward a consensus that that last sentence be
25 eliminated, and I just wanted a formal motion --
PAGE 45
MR. VANN: Mr. Chairman, I move the last sentence
2 be eliminated.
3
MRS. GRAHAM: Do I have a second?
4
DR. PRESSLY: I second.
5
MRS. GRAHAM: Do we need any further discussion?
6
MR. OWENS: I clearly understand the reason that
7 was expressed by Mr. Findley and by Mr. Vann, and also
8 explained to me by Mr. Hill, Dr. Hill, what points and what
9 danger you have in that statement, but I feel it should be
10 a statement -- I don't have the expertise at this time to
"z
11 i=
..'o"....
@;I
work out a statement to fit in that place that would not have the same kind of danger and still say what I want to say, so as far as deleting that I have no real problem; I probably
! 14 would have to vote against it because I have the feeling and
1;;
<l
:I:
15 ~
I still feel a statement of the nature should be there if
:"'"l
16 .~.. not that particular statement which has real dangers and
Q
z
17 ~ implications to us.
18
That's to go back and explain it and give you some
19 rationale behind it, my wanting to replace it and my
20 inadequacy to replace it.
21
MRS. GRAHAM: Do any staff members have any comment?
22
If not, we will take a vote. Those in favor of
23 deleting the last sentence, would you please raise your hand.
24
(A show of hands.)
25
MRS. GRAHAM: Those oppos ing .
PAGE 46
(A hand.)
I
2
MRS. GRAHAM: So we have a three-to-one vote.
3
DR. PRESSLY: That probably ought to be recorded as
4 four to one because Dr. Meredith asked me to act as his proxy
5 and said how he wanted to vote. I don't know whether he
6 would want me to do that or not.
7
MRS. GRAHAM: We'll let yoU do that if that's
8 agreeable with the rest of the committee. Any objection?
9
MR. OWENS: In such cases of a proxy, would it be
10 necessary unless there's a tie or some close vote?
"z
11 ~
e ; i...loit Q.
MRS. GRAHAM: We'll let it go by on this one. Okay? MR. OWENS: I have no problems with it, really. DR. PRESSLY: It's the next one I want to be sure
! 14 about. We'll forego this one.
f:z;;:
15 .:I
MR. VANN : Mr. Chairman, are you ready for dis cus s iot
"lit
;;)
a 16 ~.az.. on this Section II?
17
MRS. GRAHAM: Yes, we'r~ fixing to move into
18 Section II, State Board of Education, and it's awful that I
19 have to serve as the vice-chairman of this particular section
20 because the chairman and vice-chairman is supposed to keep her
21 mouth shut often, but I do have some very strong points about
22 this; however, we will proceed with writing, and Vickie
23
Well, first of all, though, Mr. Vann, did you have
24 a comment on Section II?
25
MR. VANN: I had concern about the vacancy and schoo
PAGE 47
book publishing concern.
2
First, which you stated, Melvin, the present
3 statutory law it's my understanding both on the question of
4 vacancy and school book publisher, publishing concern, is a
5 mere recital of the constitutional provision, isn't it?
6
MR. HILL: No, sir, it's an additional provision
7 actually in Title 32. The code section 2-whatever it is
8 would be the specific recttal, but there is actually a code
9 provision that specifies what the vacancies, how vacancies
10 shall be filled and the eligibility for membership, which came
CzJ 11 j:
.o~ .....
@;j
from the 1937 act. MR. VANN: What I'm saying is that the statute is
merely enacting current constitutional provisions with
! 14 reference to no person employed in a professional capacity
In
~
:I:
15 q
MR. HILL,:, But it has independent exis tence is what
CJ
~
::;)
16 .~.. I'm saying .
cz
~
17 :
MR. VANN: I recognize that, but except as it's
18 provided in the constitution it might not be there is what
19 I'm saying.
20
Anyway, what I'm concerned about is I would like
21 very much to add -- this is quite broad language, but I would
22 like very much in the last sentence on page 1 where it starts
23 by "No person employed in a professional capacity by a private
24 or public education institution or by the State Department of
25 Education, or by a school book publishing concern, and no
PAGE 48
person hose appointment would create a conflict of interest
. 2 for such ,erson;" and I would like to put a connna after that
3 word "person," as defined by law, comma, shall be eligible
4 for appointment or service on said Board. Now I'm adding
5 "or service on."
6
My reason for this is that, one, I don't think a
7 person employed at the time by a school book publishing con-
8 cern ought to be eligible for appointment to the State Board
9 of Education.
10
@
11
"z
-..jo=..:..
~ 12
~r~
! 14 lo-n :~r:
15 q
"~
;;;)
16 ~... Q Z ~
17 :
Now, the present constitutional language is much broader because it says employed by or in any~y heretofore connected with. I think that's still good language, and there must have been some reason for it when it was adopted.
DR. PRESSLY: Tom, I couldn't agree with you more, but why isn't that covered with the idea here of a conflict of interest? It seems to me that is the case of a conflict of interest, he would be ruled out anyway and we don't need
18 to name him.
19
MR. VANN: The same thing could be said with
20 reference to a person employed in a professional capacity.
21 We're dealing with conflict of interest, --
22
DR. PRESSLY: I see what you mean,
23
MR. VANN:
we're constitutionally expressing some
24 conflicts of interest that would disqualify a person, and then
25 authorize the General Assembly to express other conflicts of
PAGE 49
interest.
2
DR. PRESSLY: It's a good point.
3
MR. VANN: And also I would talk about adding the
4 words nor service onn because if a person becomes into that
5 situation after appointment, then it may be assumed that he
6 goes off, but this will make it clear that he goes off.
7
And on the question of vacancy, I recognize the
8 general law, I really feel like that the constitution ought
9 to express something like this on the vacancy on the State
10 Board of Education, that when a vacancy occurs for any
CzI
e ; ;11
I-
.oA'."..
reason the Governor shall appoint a successor to serve until
the next session of the Senate and until a successor is
appointed and qualified.
! 14
MR. OWENS: You want to add that?
!;;
:I:
15
MR. VANN: I would like to provide -- that is my
CI
'":::>
16 .~.. thinking about a vacancy .
Q
Z
17 :
Mr. Hill says in the summary, he says, you know, no
18 general law ought to provide for vacancies when there's a
19 constitutional provision, but are you saying that the
20 constitutional provision that will be included would authorize
21 the legislature to change the current method of a vacancy,
22 or --
In other words, we're not being frozen in in that
23 provision that you're saying is in the general executive
24 branch under the powers of the Governor? In other words,
25 are you saying that the legislature could provide exactly
PAGE 50
what I'm saying here if it wished to do so?
2
MR. HILL: Yes. Yes, it could be deleting that
3 law, and I understand as a practical matter that is how it
4 works in any event.
5
MR. VANN: It;is. You know, the concern to me is
6 that actually at the present time it says the State Board
7 shall fill the vacancy, and as a practical matter I think the
8 State Board defers because the Governor appoints to permit
9 the Governor to select them, and the State Board accepts the
10
..,
z II i=
'o.."....
@);j
Govemor's recommendation, and therefore what I am saying is there's really not much reason for that successor ought to be appointed in the same way as the original member.
MR. HILL: Well, your language that you would proposE
! 14 ... to add here would in fact have the effect of repealing that
':z":
15 olJ law that is on the books now to allow the Board to provide
~
;:)
16 ~... for its own successor .
zCI
17 :
If you're afraid the General Assembly won't repeal
18 that law, then that would be a good addition, but it appears
19 to me it's on the books over here in Article V that I read to
20 you earlier that when any public office shall become vacant
21 the Govemor shall promptly fill such vacancy except as
22 otherwise provided by the constitution or by law would cover
23 the situation.
24
MR. VANN: I guess what I'm saying is I would like
25 to recommend the method of filling the vacancy, whether it's
PAGE 51
in the constitution or the legislation, that this group should
2 express that the vacancy should be filled in the same manner
3 as the original appointment. I guess that's what I'm saying.
4
MR. OWENS: Isn't there a conflict with one part of
S the law, one part of that being negated if this passes in
6 that the members of the Board will select, appoint an
7 interim person in case there is a vacancy at some time?
8
MR. VANN: Presently the constitution provides and
9 an act of the legislature provides that a vacancy of a member
10 of the State Board of Education would be filled by the
selection of the members of the State Board of Education.
MR. OWENS: That's what I'm saying. Okay.
MR. VANN: Now, theoretically the Governor likewise
when the term expires could appoint the member of the State
Board of Education with the advise and consent of the Senate.
MR. OWENS: That I s what I'm saying. Would that
MR. VANN: I'm assuming that under present law, if
18 I'm correct, that if a member was appointed for seven years
19 and he died in office the day after he was qualified that
20 the State Board would fill that position for the remainder of
21 the term.
22
MR. HILL: No, no, until the next session of the
23 General Assembly, at which time the Governor appoints some-
24 one to fill the term, fill the duration.
2S
MR. VANN: I guess what I'm saying is we ought to
PAGE 52
avoid the possible conflict between the Governor. that he
2 ought to be appointed. that the successor ought to be
3 appointed in the same manner as his predecessor.
4
MR. OWENS: What you're saying, he cannot be
5 confirmed even though he's appointed by the Governor until
6 after the legislature or during the legislature, which means 7 that something has to be happening during hat interim and 8 give the Board an opportunity to do it, they could have 9 somebody to serve during that interim period until the
10 legislature meets again and the Governor has a chance to do
\zII 11 i=
'o0."...
@;i
it. Is that the -MR. HILL: Under Mr. Vann's proposal, the Governor
would fill the vacancy until the next session, at which time
! 14 ... the Senate would confirm, and under the present situation
':"z:
15 olI
the Board fills the vacancy until the next session at which
\II
'";;) 16 .~.. time the Governor appoints someone, hopefully the same one,
Q
Z 17 ::
usually the same one, but that wouldn't have to be, subject
18 to confirmation.
19
DR. PRESSLY: Mel, where I'm having my difficulty,
20 I don't see any difference in what we have here, what you've
21 suggested here and what Tom is suggesting.
22
It seems to me in both cases the Governor is
23 appointing.
24
MR. HILL~ There's this difference, if we do not
25 adopt Tom's suggestion and put it in the constitution that
PAGE 53
vacancies in office shall be filled in the same manner as
2 the original appointment, if we don't put that there
3 this law which says the Board shall fill the vacancy will
4 continue to establish the method of filling that vacancy, so
5 that if you want to change this law by the constitution, then
6 you have to include a statement similar to what he~ proposing
7 here.
8
DR. PRESSLY: I certainly think we ought to change
9 it. I agree with Tom wholeheartedly.
10
MRS. GRAHAM: Do you want to put that in the form
CzI 11 I-
'o.."....
@;i
of a motion? MR. OWENS: What I'm asking, once what you're
saying is put in here it negates the other?
! 14 I'" :I:
15 q
CI
:'"l 16 ~...
Q
Z 17 :
MR. HILL: Yes. MR. OWENS: Good. MR. VANN: I move the draft of Section II be amended to contain language that the filling of a vacancy
18 will be in the same manner as the original appointment, and
19 any vacancy shall be filled until the next session of the
20 Senate and until a successor is appointed and qualified.
21
In other words, the sense of this be included in
22 the section, so that vacancies are filled in the same manner
23 as original appointments.
24
MS. GREENBERG: Could I ask Harvey --
25
DR. PRESSLY; I'm still a little confused. Tom,
PAGE 54
why wouldn't that be accomplished if we simply said in the
2 fifth line there that starts "As each term of office expires,"
3 suppose we said "As each term of office expires or as a
4 vacancy occurs, the Governor shall appoint a successor as
5 herein provided." Wouldn't that do it?
6
MR. VANN: You know, I originally said that, Dr.
7 Pressly, as each term of office expires or a vacancy occurs
8 for any reason, but if you go back to the previous sentence
9 I had some question
10
MR. HILL: These things aren't always as simple and
11
z"
j:
easy as
they look at first blush.
We'll have to take a look
@;;o..0..0..:
at it, we understand the sense of it, and we will -MR. VANN: As a matter of fact, I had written that
! 14 in right there.
~
O:zI:l 15 olI
DR. PRESSLY: I see.
"00:
;;)
16 ~...
MR. VANN: I started reading the whole thing, I
Qz
17 ~ thought I had some trouble, and I struck it out.
18
MRS. GRAHAM: We have a motion on the floor; we do
19 not have a second.
20
DR. PRESSLY: I second.
21
MRS. GRAHAM: .Any further discussion?
22
MR. OWENS: Yes. Let me restate that, start it
23 again.
24
I agree with the statement that's being made; if
25 this maintains itself I just don't agree with the appointment
,
PAGE 55
of the Governor as a whole because the State Superintendent
2 now is being appointed. You missed the other day and I didn't
3 have anybody to help me.
4
MRS. GRAHAM: We haven It gotten to that yet.
5
MR. OWENS: This is still dealing with the Board as
6 being appointed, and we haven I t gotten to the other part.
7
MRS. GRAHAM: I was trying to be nice.
8
MR. OWENS: I lamented very deeply when the lead
9 man had to leave and you wouldn't be able to discuss this .
10 thing as freely as you should.
1:1
Z
11 i=
MRS. GRAHAM: I can step as ide and turn the chair
@;;.'o.".... over to Dr. Pressly. I am familiar with doing that. MR. VANN: We haven't even reached that issue.
! 14
MRS. GRAHAM: Right. At this point now, Odell,
I-
'4"
%
15 o!I would you agree with the motion that's been made and
1:1
:'">
16 .~.. seconded?
a
z
4
17 :
MR.. OWENS: Yes, I agree with the motion. In
18 essence I agree with what's being said here.
19
MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. So can we move on now, I mean
20 everybody favors --
21
MR.. HILL: We will draft language to that effect,
22 assuming you continue to have the members appointed.
23
MRS. GRAHAM: Any opposition? No opposition? Let's
24 go on.
25
,Okay. At this point I would like to --
PAGE 56
MR. VANN: May I continue? I've got a couple
2 other things I would like to raise here about the language
3 unless you want to go --
4
MRS. GRAHAM: 1 would like to turn the chair at
5 this point over to Dr. Pressly because I've got some points
6 1 would like to raise too. So, Dr. Pressly
7
DR. PRESSLY: Are you on Paragraph 1?
8
MRS. GRAHAM: Paragraph l(a).
9
MR. VANN: Have we agreed to include about a book
10
e" Z
11 i=
...oor:
"-
~ 12 ~
9-~
..14 .>.. ~ %
15 ol)
e"
"":;)
16 .~.. Q Z
17 ::
publishing concern, or is that --? DR. PRESSLY: I thought that was in that motion. MR. VANN: I would like to move that be added so it
would include a person employed by a school book publishing concern .
MRS. GRAHAM: Do you classify -- There's been a great deal of debate throughout the state in determining if a reference book salesman, if that would be the same thing as
18 a textbook salesman. Can anyone shed any light on any court
19 decisions that may have come about as a result of this law?
20
MR. VANN: 1 can't. Can you, Mr. Hill? Are you
21 familiar with any litigation. on this current constitutional
22 provis ion?
23
MR. HILL: I'm not aware of any.
24
MRS. GRAHAM: Could 1 ask you to see if you could
25 research this and see -- I was advised that this --
PAGE 57
MR. HILL: In other words, what the meaning of a
2 school book publishing concern is?
3
MRS. GRAHAM: Does that include like a reference
4 book representative or district manager, anyone who works
5 directly through the schools? A district director in one
6 company does work directly through the schools, and I think
7 maybe we need clarification on this.
8
MR. VANN: This is talking about a member of the
9 State Board of Education now.
10
MRS. GRAHAM: It also applies to a local school
I!I
Z
@;;11
j:
oo....r..:.
board too,
so I would think you would probably be familiar
with this.
MR. VANN: Is that in the local school board section
14 ~ !;; -c ::t:
15 .:
Io!r:I
;;;)
16 ~... zQ
17 ~
too?
MRS. GRAHAM: Yes. MR. HILL: I'm not familiar with that offhand . MRS. GRAHAM: It may not be law, but it's in the
18 code of ethics.
19
MS. GREENBERG: Are you interested in prohibiting
20 those people from --
21
MRS. GRAHAM: No, I'm not interested in prohibiting
22 thea, I'm interested in the clarification of the law as to
23 does it include reference -- district directors I guess I
24 would say because the representative would no~work directly
25 with the school. I'm talking about a person who goes into the
PAGE 58
MR. VANN: It currently would cover a person
2 emPbyed by or connected with, or in the past I think employed
3 by or connected with a school book publishing concern.
4
I assume if the reference book was published by the
5 school book publishing concern and that person was an employee
6 of it he probably would be covered but, you know, that's
7 really a difficult -- You know, I don't know.
8
MRS. GRAHAM: That's why I think we need clarifica-
9 tion, because this could be a real sticky --
10
MR. VANN: Ordinarily a constitution has to leave
a.2;11
"z
;:
.'o."....
some clarification to a court or the legislature.
words --
MRS. GRAlfAM: Okay. I see your point.
In other
! 14
Do you want to go back before we turn the chair over
I-
':<"Cr
15 .: to Dr. Pressly, do you want to go back then and restate your
"'";;;)
16 ~... recommendation on school book publisher and so forth? ~o
Qz
17 : person employed in a professional capacity by a private or
18 public educational institution, or by the State Department
19 of Education ... "
20
MR. VANN: All right. And here I would like to move
21 that we add "or by a school book publishing concern ," comma.
22
MRS. GRAHAM: Okay.
23
MR. HILL: Or by a school book publishing concern.
24
MR. VANN: COI1lIla, and then continue with these two
25 other changes, "and no person whose appointment would create
PAGE 59
a conflict of interest for such person," eliminate the comma
2 after "person," and continue with "as defined by law,'~ comma,
3 "shall be eligible for appointment to"."
4
Now I would like to add, Mr. Hill, unless you tell
5 me it's not necessary, "or service on said Board."
6
MR. HILL: I'm not sure what service on the Board
7 would mean other than service as an appointee, so I just felt
8 it was redundant.
9
MRS. GRAHAM: I know what he's talking about, though
10 I do.
MS. GREENBERG: You're saying while he's in office
he could possibly be made a member of, be employed by a school
book publishing company and he would still --~
MR. VANN: It would create a vacancy is what I'm
trying to say.
MS. GREENBERG: Could we just change the language
to "shall be eligible for service on said Board," and that
18 would include both serving on and being appointed to?
19
MR. HILL: How can you serve on the Board without
20 being appointed?
21
MS. GREENBERG: I'm saying don't repeat it,
22
MR. VANN: Does the present constitution specificalb
23 provide for a vacancy?
24
MR. OWENS: Yes, of the Board?
25
MR. VANN: I think it does.
PAGE 60
MR. OWENS: It does. It provides for filling the
2 vacancy by the Board.
3
MR. VANN: I mean for a vacancy occurring in the
4 event it happens.
5
MR. OWENS: I imagine it's just implied in the
6 statement itself that once you become a part of that, then
7 you would have -- part of a book publishing company --
8
MR. VANN: The present constitution does say if any
9 person shall be so connected or employed after becoming a
10 member of the Board, his place shall immediately become vacant
I:l Z
11 ;:
oQ....C..
9;1 ! 14 el:n-r 15 ~
Cl QC :::l
16 .~..
az 17 :
and I just want to be sure we're retaining that a vacancy is created if after appointment
MR. HILL: I see. I see. MRS. GRAHAM: I know what he means, because there are people who are now serving on some school boards who really have a conflict of interest, and they just keep serving until their term expires and nobody wants to rock the
18 boat and
19
MR. OWENS: You're speaking of local or state?
20
MRS. GRAHAM: I'm speaking of local school boards,
21 but I think you maybe might have the same type thing that
22 could happen on the State Board too.
23
DR. PRESSLY: I think it is a good word to put in.
24
MR. VANN: I'm interested in creating a vacancy if
25 that occurred. Now, if that's not strong enough to do it,
PAGE 61
I'm interested!.in retaining what we say, but I felt that the
2 addition of the word, "service" meant that the person becomes
3 ineligible if that happens after his appointment or during
4 his term. I feel like it ought to be clear as it's presently
5 provided in the constitution that these events, whether
6 existing at the time of the appointment or arising during the
7 term makes them ineligible for appointment and creates a
8 vacancy.
9
MR. HILL: Okay. I think your language would be
10 all right. We will think about it, and if we don't feel that
is strong enough we can add that in.
MR. VANN: My motion is to make those additions I
have just discussed in paragraph (a).
MRS. GRAHAM: Any objection?
Hearing no objection, I guess we'll stick with that.
Do not move on to the next section, because at this
point I would like to turn the chair over to Dr. Pressly and
18 protest one more time.
19
MR. HILL: Take the soapbox?
20
MR. VANN: Where are we?
21
DR. PRESSLY: We're on II still, II(a).
22
MR. VANN: 11(\)1
23
DR. PRESSLY: II(b), back where we were.
24
MR. VANN: Okay.
25
DR. PRESSLY: All right.
PAGE 62
MRS. GRAHAM: Since I was not present at the last 2 meeting, Vickie, what was the vote on appointed school board 3 versus elected?
4
MR. OWENS: It was a tie vote, and then it was
5 voted -- the vote was tied, and the chairman voted to break
6 the tie.
7
MS. GREENBERG: No .
8
MR. OWENS: Am I correct?
9
MS. GREENBERG: I'll go over the votes. There was
10 a problem because everyone wanted a State Board of Education
III
11
Z
i=
method of selection to be retained as it was.
There was
Ill:
2
OIl
@);~ unanimous agreement that that be retained as is, but when it got down to the State School Superintendent there was
! 14 ... dissention, and the problem was if you do appoint the State
':"r
15 olI
Roard,
then there was some disagreement -- well, some people
III Ill:
~
16 ~ didn't mind the appointed Board and the appointed School OIl zQ
17 : Superintendent, but some people wanted the accountability so
18 they wanted the elected superintendent and appointed board,
19 so the vote was as far as the State --
20
I'm sorry, this is just the opposite. Excuse me.
21
There was unanimous agreement as far as State
22 School Superintendent, the vote was five to nothing for an
23 appointed State School Superintendent.
24
DR. PRESSLY: Everybody wanted that.
25
MR. VANN: Everybody wanted what?
PAGE 63
MS. GREENBERG: The State School Superintendent to
2 be appointed by the Board.
3
There were five members voting, and five members
4 were in favor of the appointed School Superintendent, except 5 when it came down to deciding the method of selection of the 6 State Board there were problems, and that vote was three to
7 two as to changing the method of selection of the State Board
8 of Education.
9
MR. VANN: Wait a minute now.
10
MRS. GRAHAM: If I had been here, and I did advise
I!J
11
Z j:
Dr.
Meredith prior to the last meeting that
I would not be
o..Il..l..:
~ 12 ~ able to be here because I was on a campaign trail myself, you
@~~~ would have had a tie vote.
14!
MR. OWENS: I needed your proxy.
!;;
x 15 ~
MRS. GRAHAM: So this is one reason I pointed out
I!J
Ill:
::>
16 .~.. today that I am not for or against the State School Board,
I:l
Z 17 :
I mean I've said repeatedly that one or the other can work,
18 it's the people who are on the Board that make the difference.
19 I think we have a fine State School Boardand I have no
20 gripes with the Board, but I think in looking to the future 21 that we could come up with some big problems if we have an
22 appointed State School Superintendent and State School Board,
23 and I know because I'm from an area that has had this, and
24 believe me you, it is very difficult to get accountability 25 when you have no means of getting these people to realize
PAGE 64
their obligation.
2
I just wanted to register my point again that I
3 want to try to keep some accountability either in the State
4 Superintendent's office or the State School Board, and I
5 guess that's enough to be said, but had I been here, and I
6 did tell Dr. Meredith that I wanted him to vote for me on
7 that issue, it would have been a tie vote.
8
Dr. Pressly, I have said my piece.
9
DR. PRESSLY: All right. Shall we start over
10 again this morning? It seems to me we are in the process
1/1
Z
11
j:
ocr:
here of rehashing something we have already reached a
II.
1M
~ 12 ~ decision on. Unfortunately we had an absentee, but we have
~)~ other members of the committee also absent I believe, don't
! 14 t:i we.
~:r
15 q
1c/r1:
MR. HILL: Yes.
::>
16 ~ a1zM
DR. PRESSLY: So we had come I thought to, finally
~
17 : after discussing it over many, many hours and many, many days
18 to a decision, but if you want to reopen it we can certainly
19 reopen it and discuss it again, because we had arrived at
20 the point where we too wanted accountability, Mrs. Graham,
21 but we thought that we could have it with the State Board
22 being appointed by the Governor and with the Superintendent
23 being appointed because this is all at the will of the Senate, 24 and they certainly are elected people who have to respond
25 immediately to the public.
PAGE 65
MRS. GRAHAM: I will point out again to you that
2 the people that I've talked to, many~ross the state of
3 Georgia, say never ever will they go with both being
4 appointed, and if we want to keep on spinning our wheels,
5 I mean you can
6
DR. PRESSLY: Of course they say that, but they
7 might be outvoted if it came to a vote.
8
MRS. GRAHAM: In fact in the newspaper the Governor
9 and the Select Committee said never, House Speaker Murphy
10 said never would he go with both being appointed, so for the
"z
11 j:
'..o"....
record I am just simply saying that I think as a subcommittee
@~r:i that we need to somewhere along the line give this a little
bit more thought. I'll die, I'll go to my grave saying this.
14
1
~
MR. VANN: One of the discussions was appointment
'"
:I:
15 olI and election of both Board and Superintendent, and the
":'>"
16 .~.. judgment came out, and I thought it was unanimous that we
oz
17 ~ would retain the present method of selectionof the State
18 Board, and it was not unanimous that we would go for an
19 appointment of the Superintendent. Some of us felt like
20 under those circumstances they should continue to elect the
21 Superintendent; the majority felt like he should be
22 appointed, and that's the reason for this draft. That was
23 my impression of our last consensus.
24
MRS. GRAHAM: I understand your vote and all of
25 that, it's just that I
PAGE 66
MR. VANN: I personally would prefer to continue
~
2 to address the issue of electing the State School Superin-
3 tendent as now provided.
4
The State Board of Education in their individual
5 view, they have no officail view, were divided five to five
6 on that, and the State Superintendent of Schools says that he
7 will serve in any way that he reaches the position, but he
8 would rather be appoin~ed, he feels the position should be
9 appointed.
10
ell
..Z
II j:
o"..-.
a':i 14 ..~:..r.. ..15 olI ell
;;)
16 .~..
za 17 :
MS. GRAHAM: Okay. I think I have -MR. VANN: That was the kind of compromise we reached. I would assume we would have still considerable discussion on this issue on the whole committee. MR. HILL: Oh, yes MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. That's the on'~y reason I have said what I've said today is I just felt I needed to continue to say it.
18
MR. VANN: I support you wholeheartedly on electing
19 the State School Board.
20
DR. PRESSLY: I think this is a thing that's going
21 to be discussed over and over again. I think all of us
22 recognize the fact that what we as a committee have decided
23 could very well be set aside, but that's not our concern as
24 it seems to me. We have to make the best decision we can,
25 and if it's later set aside that's all right, we have to be
PAGE 67
understanding and go right along with it.
2
Is that about the point you think we have reached,
3 Mel?
4
MR.. HILL: Just so that we understand completely
5 what the options have been that have been rejected along the
6 way, i8 it the sense of the eommdttee that this is all the 7 options that you feel we want to consider?
8
In other words, we have talked about the possibility
9 of having the State Board selected by caucus of the legis la-
10 tors from the area similar to the way the State Board of
III Z
11 ~ Education is selected; we discussed the possibility of having
..o....
@;I the local School Superintendents -- excuse, me local school boards meeting in caucus to elect the representative from
! 14 their area. We have had a number of other possibilities that
I-
'"
:E:
15 ~ have been put forward.
III
'::">
16 ~...
Is it accurate to say that the committee has decided
cz
17 ~ that the system that we now have for the method of selection
18 of the State Board is preferable to either of those two
19 other options, regardless of what we decide to do with the
20 State School Superintendnet?
21
DR. PRESSLY: 1 think that was what our consensus
22 was, that we liked it the way it is and would like for it to
23 stay just as it is. This is for the State Board.
24
MR.. OWENS: There was consensus not so much that we
25 liked it the way it is, but more than we would really prefer
PAGE 68
that the Superintendent be appointed, but we could not find
2 a feasible way to get the board elected, so under that feeling
3 then we say that the best of the options we have would be
4 that it stay like it is.
5
DR. PRESSLY: Yes, that's why the vote was so close.
6
MR. OWENS: Because to determine that one or the
7 other be elected, and we couldn't find a way to elect the
8 Board that was feasible or acceptable, and it reverted back
9 to what it was in the beginning.
10
DR. PRESSLY: She has had her opportunity to express
herself, and I would like to turn the chair back over to her.
MRS. GRAHAM: Thank you, Dr. Pressly.
Under Section II(b), do we have anyone who has a
statement or a question?
MR. HILL: II(a) or II(b)?
MRS. GRAHAM: II(b).
MR. HILL: What was your feeling, we were going to
18 leave this as is until we have more members here to reopen it,
19 did you want to reopen it today, or --7
20
MR. OWENS: You're asking her.
21
MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. Odell, would you go ahead and
22 make your statement?
23
MR. OWENS: I was just saying that under the
24 circumstances today and looking around the room too I don'~
25 really see a reason to reopen it. I think we have really
PAGE 69
gone through all the avenues of discussion we can go through,
2 and until we get to the full committee so that they can voice'
3 their opinion on it one way or the ot:her I just feel we are
4 exercising futility.
5
MRS. GRAHAM: Do you want to put that in the form of
6 a motion?
7
MR. OWENS: What, that we accept --
8
MRS. GRAHAM: That we discontinue discussion on this
9 section.
10
MR. OWENS: You're talking about Section III now?
Czl 11 i=
@;;".oG.o.
MRS. GRAHAM: I thought we were talking about II. MR. VANN: She was talking about the issue of II(a) , and we're going to II(b).
14 ~
MR OWENS: You want to say that II(a) --
!;;
<:cl
15 .:I
MRS. GRAHAM: No, I asked did anyone have any
Cl
":> 16 .~.. comment under Section II(b) , B as in boy
Q
Z
<l
17 :
MR. VANN: I have only one coument.
18
MR. OWENS: I was responding to the wrong thing.
19 I apologize for that.
20
MR. VANN: I would like to continue the word that's
21 in the constitution after the word law, and existing at the
22 time of the adoption of the constitution of 1945, together
23 with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter
24 provided by law I believe is the way it reads.
25
I'm not sure --
PAGE 70
MRS. GRAHAM: That's the correct wording.
2
MR. VANN: I'm not sure, I have never been sure
3 exactly what that language meant, but it either had one of
4 two purposes in my opinion, one of them was to elevate powers
5 and duties in existence at that time to the constitutional
6 level, or merely to continue in force and effect the laws
7 in force and effect at the time of the adoption of it, and
8 probably some other sections of the constitution do that,
9 don't they?
10
.."z
11 ;:
.~..
~ 12 ~
~-i 14 ~ I':"z: ..15 q ":;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
What I mean is the adoption of a new constitution except to the extent that it conflicts with existing laws continues in force and effect existing laws.
MR. HILL: Yes, that's true. You know, we have discussed this before, and the staff is not recommending that this provision be carried forward because of the very reason that powers and duties of the State Board are provided by law, we have a provision here
18 and a summary here of all the laws that now relate to the
19 State Board, they go on and on and on, and I would say that
20 most of these laws, I would say ninety to 95 percent of these
21 laws are all laws that were passed after 1945, and the laws
22 that it's referring to are such a small part of the total
23 package of powers that the Board has it just seems rather
24 unnecessary to give those earlier very minor or small aspects
25 of the Board's powers and duties such an elevated position
PAGE 71
when we have such a comprehensive set of provisions, and I
2 think it appears to me that the reason for it at that time
3 may have been to add a certain protection to the Board in
4 its earliest days so that there wasn't a question of it having
5 its basic functions taken away, but over time the Board has
6 achieved such a stature and such a position that, you know,
7 it's just not realistic to assume that it's going to have its
8 powers and duties cut back, I mean you've seen a constant
9 expans ion of the powers and duties, and to continue forward
10 this kind of language under these circumstances seems
@;;11
z"
j:
..'o."...
unnecessary and it
does
create in the mind of anyone who reads
this a question as to what exactly are these laws, are they
given some special sanction when none of the other.: laws we've
! 14 passed since then are so dealt with,
l;;
:z:
15 ~
MR, VANN: This language is contained in the
"'~"
16 .~.. university system constitution provision likewise, is~'tit?
oz
17 ~
MR. HILL: And it was removed from that section
18 because we identified statutes that it related to, the ones
19 that the Board of Regents felt were necessary have been
20 brought forward under the constitition; that language has been
21 eliminated in the Board of Regents section,
22
MR. VANN: In the proposed section?
23
MR, HILL: In the proposed draft of that section.
24
MR. VANN: I have never seen the powers that you
25 are referring to, and I think it would be appropriate if
PAGE 72
this committee was provided with a copy of those which you say 2 existed at the time of the constitution of 1945.
3
MR. HILL: There is a reference in here to those
4 that are prior to that.
5
Well, that's going to be -- it's hard to say
6 exactly, it might be fifty pages worth of statutory material.
7
MS. GREENBERG: The other point is a lot of those
8 have been repealed due to subsequent legislation, and there
9 is an interesting problem too. If you consider that those
10 were elevated to constitutional status, then the method of
\II Z
11 ~
...o0:
"-
~;~
repealing them is unconstitutional, and you're going to have this if you maintain this in the constitution, you're going to have a lot of problems in the future with it because people
! 14 don't even know what it means, and I doubt if ...... the Attorney
I-
<OIl
z:
15 Q General's office gave me an oral opinion that that was really
\II
0:
::l
16 ~... just a very careful drafting decision
az
=<
17
MR. VANN: A very what?
18
MS. GREENBERG: Careful drafting decision of 1945.
19
MR. VANN: Very careful?
20
MS. GREENBERG: Careful, so that these would not be
21 elevated to constitutional status, but they would simply be
22 continued under the new constitution as legislative law.
23
MR. VANN: In other words, it meant the second thing
24 I said.
25
MR. HILL: Yes.
PAGE 73
MR. VANN: Well, I still feel like that as a 2 member of the committee that I would like to see and be
3 advised, if the others don't, exactly what we're talking 4 about here if it was elevated to constitutional level. As
5 far as I'm concerned, I would like to know what I'm
6 eliminating.
7
MR. HILL: You're not eliminating anything. All of
8 these laws are carried forward identically to the way they
9 now appear on the books, so that that's the thing -- there 10 will be no elimination of any provision with the adoption of
the new constitution; all statutes or law to the extent
they're not in conflict with the new constitution will be continued, statutory law.
We spoke to Eldon Basham, the legal counsel to the Superintendent, and he said this has been basically disregarded from the standpoint of the General Assembly and they
have in fact repealed a number of these laws that were passed 18 in 1937 or that were in effect as of '45, and it really is 19 dead wood in this provision.
20
DR. PRESSLY: You're really assuring us then that if
21 we pass (b), accept (b), that we 're not eliminating anything?
22
MR. HILL: No, you're not.
23
DR. PRESSLY: I move we accept it.
24
MRS. GRAHAM: Do we have a second?
25
DR. PRESSLY: Mr. Findley has something to say.
PAGE 74
MR. FINDLEY: On (b), the language of (b), I would
2 like to raise a couple of points and see what your intention
3 is.
4
If you start off with (b), the first phrase,
5 '~xcept as herein provided, the State Board shall have such
6 powers and duties as provided by law," that language "Except
7 as herein provided" is alerting you to some constitutional
8 language that will be beyond the General Assembly as I read
9 this.
10
MR. VANN: That's the way I read it too.
1:1
Z
11 i=
.o.I.l.l..:
MR. FINDLEY: Then you read the statement (c) then
12 ~ which is "The State Board shall establish minimum educational
@ r l standards for all elementary and secondary school students
! 14 lo:-nr
and may adopt rules and regulations to ensurefuat an adequate
15 olI education for the citizens is provided."
1:1
Ill:
;;)
16 ~...
It seems to me that under the context of this, and
Q
Z
17 ~ maybe this is what you meant, that under the context of this
18 that this appears in where these powers as I read it are
19 moved beyond the reach of the General Assembly, then the
20 State Board would have the authority to do APEG by regulation
21 is the way I read it.
22
MRS. GRAHAM: Mel and Vickie, do you think perhaps
23 you would like to do additional footwork on this and bring-a
24 report back at the next meeting before we take any action?
25
MR. HILL: There's two separate issues here.
PAGE 75
I really didn't catch the drift of what Dr. Pressly
2 was saying before, but we were arguing about an addition that'
3 Mr. Vann wanted to put into (b) as opposed to the entire 4 Section (b). I think Harvey is right that if we would 5 continue to state that the Board could have rules and 6 regulations and adopt rules and regulations to carry out this 7 mandate of the constitution, then it may be writing itself 8 out of the General Assembly, and that wasn't the intention
9 that was meant.
10
I think this is a question of insufficient con-
I-'
11
Z j:
sideration by the staff of all the ramifications of this
..oll..l..i
@~}~i language. I think Harvey felt that if~ just eliminated "and may adopt rules and regulations" that we would allow the 14! General Assembly to come in and establish the means by which
t:;r;
15 olI this minimum educational standards will be enforced, and that
I-'
llli
:>
16 .~.. would not be delegating to the Board total authority, but
17 czg; that's a separate question from what we were talking about
18 earlier whether these laws of '45, in existence in '45 should 19 be elevated or continue to be given special status in the
20 constitution as opposed to being brought foward like all
21 other laws and subject to repeal or modification by the
22 General Assembly in the future if necessary.
23
MR. VANN: I think probably Mr. Findley is correct.
24 As a matter of fact (c) and (d) -- Except as herein
25 provided is elevating us to a legislative body instead of
PAGE 76
a regulating body.
2
MR. FINDLEY: I would make the same -- I think (c)
3 probably carries more implications than perhaps the others,
4 although the same thing about (d) on adequate vocational
5 education. I don't know if that would be within the reach of
6 the General Assembly if the constitution to the exclusion of
7 the General Assembly puts the duty on the State Board to see
8 that an adequate vocational education is provided.
9
The same implication is repeated in (f), "Except
10 as herein provided ... powers and duties of the members of the
11
"z
~
Board shall be provided by law," so you have lifted out this
'.o"..
IU
@;i enumeration in effect to say the General Assembly cannot reach those, or at least that is the implication of the language.
! 14 I don't know what in the world the court would actually do
to
':<z"C:
15 0:1 with it, but I'm just wondering if that was the intention
"'";;)
16 ~ that you make the state Board sovereign over educational
IU
Q
Z
<C
17 ::
matters to the exclusion of the General Assembly.
18
MRS. GRAHAM: We do not have a second to your
19 motion. Do we want to reconsider this or leave it until the 20 next meeting and discuss it further, or what is your feeling
21 on this?
22
MR. VANN: Let me ask this. I think the objections
23 are legitimate, and we don't have a second.
24
Mr. Hill, in (e), this is provided somewhere else,
25 isn't it?
PAGE 77
MR. HILL: That's right. It's beeft moved to here,
2 because there is a separate section, Section VI, that's
3 grants, bequests and donations, and it's two paragraphs, one
4 of which relates to the grants, bequests and donations to the
5 Board of Regents and the Board of Education, and another one
6 that relates to those same grants to area and independent
7 systems, and we're just going to put these provisions in their
8 respective places, in their article rather than in a separate
9 section, so this was transferred over with essentially the
10 same language we have now so Section VI can be eliminated.
.."z
11 j:
MR. VANN: For instance, you've used the language
2...
~~\r~~ State Department of Education; is that current constitutional 12 language?
14 ~
MR. HILL: Presently it says the State Board of
t;;
:z:
..15 olI Education can accept for the use of their respective systems
":)
16 ~... of education, the Board of Regents can accept for the
cz
17 : university system, and the State Board can accept for its
18 system, and I thought the State Department was the system.
19
MR. VANN: I think it may be legislatively a system.
20 I don't know, this is the first time that we have --
21
MR. HILL: Elevated the Department of Education to
22 constitutional status?
23
MR. VANN: Right.
24
MR. HILL: I think this should be rephrased, then,
25 just talk about the system that it has jurisdiction over.
PAGE 78
MR. VANN: Maybe it should be for the use of the
2 state system.
3
Is this the total draft?
4
MS. GREENBERG: There's three sections.
5
MR. VANN: Just these three sections?
6
MRS. GRAHAM: Do we have any additional comments
7 then on (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f)?
8
MR. HILL: Yes, I have some. I wo~ld like to know
9 the policy of the committee with respect to enforcement of
10 minimum educational standards. That's where this came from.
1:1 Z
11 j::
@;;..'o."...
I thought we had discussed the fact -MR. VANN: If this was to be retained, I had stricken the word "shall" to "may."
! 14 t; <{ :z:
15 0:1
1:1
'":;) 16 .~..
zQ
17 ~
MR. OWENS: Where is that? MRS. GRAHAM: Under (d)? MR. VANN: Under (c) . MS. GREENBERT~ What was the implication of the
18 change?
19
MR. VANN: What's the implication of "shall"?
20
MR. OWENS: May gives you some flexibility. Shall
21 binds it.
22
MRS. GRAHAM: From a legal standpoint, may I ask our
23 legal advisors what is the difference in the word may and
24 shall in your opinion?
25
MR. HILL: There's a world of difference. If you
PAGE 79
left this language "The State Board shall establish minimum
2 standards," it would be a mandate on the Board that one of
3 their duties, one of their responsibilities as a Board would
4 be to establiSh such standards, and concomitant to that would
5 be I would assume some responsibility to see that the standar~
6 are in fact met by the primary and secondary schools.
7
If you eliminate the last clause about rules and
8 regulations to do that, then I think it would be within the
9 realm of the General Assembly to establish the means by which
10 those standards would be enforced, but when we had Dr.
@;;11
"z
j:
.'2"..
McDaniel here
to
speak
to
the
committee we had the
impression
that he felt that this should be a mandate of the Board
and that even with respect to private schools that the Board
! 14 t;;
should have some ability to make sure that a minimum adequate
<:zl:
15 q education was provided and to also take over -- he also felt
"'";;;)
16 ~... they could take over if it became necessary a local system
zQ
17 : if that system was found to be not providing
18
MR. VANN: I think that was one of the critical
19 things, the ability to enforce both legislative and
20 authorized Board requirements in local systems, which the
21 present power as we understand it would generally rest in
22 witholding of funds, we don't feel like -- it may be -- that's
23 a method that the federal government uses and it may be a
24 method that brings people in line, but it doesn't help the
25 children, but I didn't understand that he was determining
PAGE 80
an elevation of this type of thing to the constitutional level
2
MR. HILL: So it's your feeling it would better be
3 left unsaid?
4
MR. VANN: Well, I don't -- Yes, and particularly
5 it expresses to me a statement we might be required to
6 establish some standard, mandatory standard to move through
7 and get out of public education.
8
MRS. GRAHAM: I heard Dr. McDaniel make his address
9 on this subject at the Jekyll meeting, and Odell I'm sure you
10 did also. I think the buck is going to have to stop some-
11
"z
j: cr:
where, but one of my concerns
about
this
section is
that what
.~..
12 ~ do we do about some of our children based on -- Excuse me,
@ r l let me back up.
! 14
Based on what Dr. McDaniel said at Jekyll Island,
l-
Oll
oC(
:r
15 01) he announced,,'that he felt sure that the State Board of
"cr:
:;)
16 ~... Education would come up with some type of minimum standards
az
17 : in 1986 I believe was the year he announced, and say that the
18 State School Board does come up with these standards, what
19 are we going to do about some children who fall into the
20 exceptional child category or under the special education
21 category who maybe just have -- say they have a weakness in
22 a certain area, and yet they have the certain standards that
23 they have to pass; are they going to receive a diploma for
24 attendance, or will they receive a diploma for
I mean
25 how will the State School Board deal with this type thing
PAGE 81
if it is mandated by the constitution?
2
MR. VANN: It's a problem that's been discussed,
3 debated, considered. The State School Board is definitely
4 moving towards requirements of achievement by students of
5 certain standards; as to what impact it will have upon those
6 who may not in any event a:hieve the standards I don't know,
7 but the movement is towards some type of classification or
8 certificate or diploma, but at the present time we have
9 adopted high school graduation requirements that are being
10
"z
@;;11 i..o.=...:.. 14 ~ I'"<l( :r 15 olI "..: ::> 16 ~... CI Z <l( 17 ~
implemented over this period of time. MRS. GRAHAM: That won't go into law, though, until
'86? MR. VANN: It's going in in phases. MRS. GRAHlt\M: Well, okay. That was my question. MR. VANN: We haven't adopted anything like an exit
exam at present time . MRS. GRAHAM: There are some local systems in the
18 state of Georgia who have, but that's another problem.
19
MR. VANN: Yes, Ma'am, and as a matter of fact
20
MRS. GRAHAM: Glynn County has.
21
MR. VANN: I think McRae. What's the county seat?
22 They adopted it and had an appeal to the State Board of
23 Education, and I think it's gone to the courts, and the courts
24 have upheld the right of a local system to establish a
25 graduation requirement.
PAGE 82
You know, the more I look at this, some of the thin~E
2 you seek to achieve to go in like (e) and (f), but the languag.
3 "Sxcept as herein provided" probably ought to be eliminated
4 ~d ought to be just "The State Board of Education shall have
5 such powers and duties as provided by law," and I would like
6 to add the other because I don't know what you're eliminating,
7 but--
8
MR. OWENS: You eliminate (f) at the same time?
9
MR. VANN: Well, apparently something in the nature
10 of (e> ought to be in there, and apparently something in the
1:1
11 5Z
Well, (f) could be in there or combined in (b), except
@);;2... it would be eliminated ''Except as herein provided." MR. OWENS: That seems to be the key as I see it.
! 14
MR.. VANN: I guess what we would be doing is leaving
M
z<C:
15 ob the determinations of direction of education, the administra-
1a::1
::I
16 .~.. tion of it both to the General Assembly and to the State
zQ
17 g Board of Education.
18
MR.. HILL: I guess my question would be whether
19 there i8 any need for additional authority in the Board to
20 establish minimum standards. Is there any
If we would
21 include a statement such as (c), the State Board may
22 establish minimum standards, would that give the Board any
23 additional clout?
24
MR. VANN: I think what we need to do is have the
25 ability to enforce them.
PAGE 83
MR. HILL: Well, if it said may establish minimum
2 standards and may enforce in such manner as may be provided by
3 law, would that be satisfactory?
4
Would you like the independent authority, the ru1e-
5 making power to enforce them? That's the way it was
6 originally drafted, but as Harvey pointed out, that would
7 basically write the General Assembly out of the enforcement
8 mechanism, and you may not want to do that.
9
MR. VANN: Your statement, what you said might have
10
Czl 11 I-
..'o"....
~ 12 ~
@~)r1~4! I'~" :J: 15 o:l Cl '":::l 16 .~.. Q Z ~ 17 ::i
some real merit to it, "The State Board of Education may establish minimum educational standards for all elementary and secondary school students, and may adopt rules and regulations to ensure that an adequate education ... " "May establish md enforce as provided by law, II which you suggest adding that phrase at the end of it. Is that what you're --7
You see, APEG is as far as I'm concerned a tool for education in Georgia that's established the direction for
18 education in Georgia, and grants regulatory authority to the
19 State Board of Education to carry out many of these things,
20 but we don't -- it's not frequent, but we have had problems
21 where we feel like systems are not carrying out their,
22 responsibilities, and that he had more in mind that there
23 ought to be something which authorized the State Board of
24 Education through some due process procedure to take over a
25 local system and operate it until such time as it was brought
PAGE 84
back into conformity and returned to the local system rather 2 than the withholding of funds and exercise all of the 3 constitutional duties and responsibilities of the local
4 system during that period and, of course, in my judgment this
5 would have to be through some type of due process procedure,
6 but I
7
MRS. GRAHAM: Doesn't the State Board of Education
8 already have this authority?
9
MR. VANN: Well, not in so many words, not by any
10
CzI 11 i=
.o~ ".".
e'~'1 14 !... ':"r 15 .:> CI '";;) 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
court authority. We have discussed as to whether we might
have the authority to be appointed as receiver of a system or
something of this nature, but there might be serious questions
as to whether
I don't know. Mr. Findley, do you?
MR. FINDLEY: I would doubt it very seriously .
MR. VANN: I would too.
MR. FINDLEY: I think the constitution vests control
and management of local school systems in local boards of
18 education, and your authority towlthhold money is really about
19 the strongest enforcement tool that you have.
20
Now, if a system actually defaulted to the extent
21 that it simply quit providing an education, a public education
22 a public school, then it could be that the State Board by
23 construction as you say, as a receiver or something might
24 have some authority. I think all that would have to be
25 Unscrambled in the courts.
PAGE 85
But I think your authority now is mainly through
2 the purse strings as you point out,
3
MRS. GRAHAM: Do we have any further discussion, or
4 do we have any disagreement with what has been said?
5
MR. HILL: Then finally to go into subsection (d),
6 the reason for that statement -- and again I think it would
7 benefit from additional drafting attention, but the purpose
8 of that statement was to centralize the responsibility for
9 vo-tech programs in the Board so that it was clear who in the
10 state was responsible for those programs, and I think this may
be too broad language; it may be much broader than we intend,
but the question for the staff the next time is should we
include some statement about vo-tech programs and the
responsibility for those programs?
MR, VANN: I don't have any objections to it, I'm
just not -- I can't recall to mind, are there any vocational,
any constitutional vocational sections in the constitution?
18
MR. HILL: There's a provision over in Section IX
19 that allows for a special school to be created by cooperation
20 of the local systems, but that is the extent to which vo-tech-
21
MR. VANN; I think it would be well to place the
22 responsibility, I certainly do, and it's currently being done
23 by the State Board of Education, but I don't know what the
24 impact of this is. There's no way we can do it without
25 ftmding, no way we can do any of this without funding as far
PAGE 86
as that goes. That's up to the General Assembly.
2
MRS. GRAHAM: If you start dealing with vocational-
3 technical education. then what about your other educational
4 programs? Are we going to add those later, or --?
5
MR. VANN: Ma ' am?
6
MRS. GRAHAM: I'm throwing this thought out, and
7 mostly directing this to Mel and Vickie.
8
If we start saying that the State Board of Education
9 shall see that adequate vocational-technical educational
10 opportunities are provided. how is this going to leave us
11
"z
j:
in the future when we start maybe adding some other areas
'A.o"...
@);~ under the Department of Education? MR. VANN: What other areas?
! 14
MRS. GRAHAM: I don't know; whatever the future may
l-
UI ~
:I:
15 o1J
hold.
"'";:)
16 ~...
MR. HILL: That is a good point. Miriam. because the
Q
Z
17
~
:
minute you start delineating
18
MR. VANN: You start excluding.
19
MR. RILL: -- you start excluding, so that's a good
20 point, but there was a feeling expressed earlier that this is
21 one area which is fuzzy and there would be some benefit
22
MR. VANN: My understanding of the vocational
23 education in Georgia is that the federal legislation requires
24 there be a state agency to administer it, and that by statute
25 the State Board of Education is also made the State Board of
PAGE 87
Vocational Education.
2
In a sense I guess what you would be doing here is .
3 constitutionally establishing the State Board of Education as
4 the State Board of Vocational Education.
5
MS. GREENBERG: Didn't this address an issue that
6 came up in another meeting of another committee whether or
7 not to establish a separate Board of Vocatiopal Education?
8 This was the --
9
MR. VANN: The governance of vocational education
10
CzI
11 oaI....-:..
@;~ ! 14 !;; -<l :r 15 ~ Ca:I ;;;) 16 ~... Q Z 17 g-<;l
has been debated and continues to be debated. MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. Do we have any further
discussion on this, or shall we just leave this at this point? MR. HILL: Well, I would like these two quest.i0ns
clarified for us for next time from the committee if ppssible~ Whether we should include some statement in (c)
about the authority but not the mandate of the Board to provide for minimum standards and enforcement mechanisms as
18 provided by law, and then secondly whether we should have any
19 statement at all about those type programs.
20
MRS. GRAHAM: Is that agreeable with all members?
21
DR. PRESSLY: I think he's raised the question as
22 to whether we want him to do it or don't want him to do it
23 rather than taking a position.
24
As you well know, I don't understand all of the
25 ramifications of the law at all. My idea would be yes,
PAGE 88
that's exactly what we want you to do is to state this for us.
2
MR. HILL: Okay. We will present
3
MR. OWENS: You gave two questions there. One was
4 authority; what was the other one?
5
MR. VANN: Vocational education.
6
PRo PRESSLY: (c) and (d).
7
MR. OWENS: Oh, (c) and (d).
8
MRS. GRAHAM: Let's move to (e) and (f). Does
9 anyone have a statement on (e)? Any objection?
10
DR. PRESSLY: That one already exists, you just
t.' Z
11 i=
@;;o.'"".".
moved it from another spot. MR. HILL: We're going to restate that so the State
Board of Education is identified excuse me, State Depart-
! 14 ment is identified. We're just going to say for the use of
l-
V>
:r
15 ~
the state educational system or some such language.
t.'
'::">
16 ~...
It is a transfer of a provision from another section
Q
Z 17 ~
MRS. GRAHAM: Okay. Does anybody else have any
18 comment on (f) ?
19
MR. VANN: We were saying that probably --
20
MR. HILL: We have to say "Except as herein
21 provided "
22
MR. VANN: We have to say "as herein provided"
23 because (a) does deal with some qualifications. (a) only
24 deals with qualifications, it doesn't deal with compensation
25 or removal from office.
PAGE 89
Those things could well be -- For instance, if
2 you're concerned about accountability, one method to provide
3 accountability is to provide some type of removal from office
4 by recall like an elected official.
5
MRS. GRAHAM: That is a good point.
6
Does anyone else have a statement on (f)?
7
MR. OWENS: Is there any section, any case, any
8 possible reasons for recall?
9
MR. VANN: What is the -- (f) repeats powers and
10
CzI 11 t-
o<
o
A-
12 ~
~~F~ i ! 14 l;; :r 15 ~ CI 0< ;:) 16 .~.. Q z 17 ~
duties that's in 0, doesn't it?
MR. HILL: This is a problem that's come up with the other boards, constitutional boards, where there is the power of the board as a whole, then in some cases there were powers of the members in terms, or duties of the members in terms of attending meetings and whatnot, so we did have a distinction between the board itself and the members .
MR. VANN: Between the members and the Board.
18
MR. HILL: That's somewhat confusing. We may
19 decide not to include that in (f) because of that, but there 20 was a thought that there could be some duties on the members
21 that are not of the board itself.
22
MRS. GRAHAM: Any other comments or statements on
23 (f)?
24
If there is none, we will move to Section III, the
25 State School Superintendent, and do we have anyone who" would
PAGE 90
like to add to, to delete and so forth to this Section III
2 starting with Paragraph I and the first couple of sentences
3 there?
4
MR. VANN: I prefer to elect the superintendent,
5 but I guess we voted on that,
6
MR. OWENS: We have talked about that. The way it
7 stands--
8
MR. VANN: We will reserve that for the whole
9 committee, I guess.
10
"z
11 j:::
'o.Q"...
@;I 14 ~ lV) -:<r 15 .:> '"" ::l 16 ~... o Z -< 17 ~
MRS. GRAHAM: Mr. Vann, I prefer an appointed State School Superintendent, so we are in disagreement there, but we'll remain friends.
MR. VANN: Yes, Ma'am. I'm not going to get mad with you about it if you don't get mad with me.
I would like to say that perhaps your section on vacancies involves it, but there's nothing in here about filling a vacancy.
18
DR. PRESSLY: Down about the 8th line --
19
MRS. GR.A.HAM: "In case of a vacancy in such position
20 for any reason, the Board shall appoint a new State School
21 Superintendent. 11
22
MR. VANN: Okay. My problem was I guess I was
23 changing that sentence, I just noted down here it's just a
24 question of language. In the second sentence, in the second
25 line of the second sentence after the word "office" I would
PAGE 91
suggest the filling of vacancies therein, and then in the
2 next sentence I would suggest that in case of an appointment
3 or vacancy in such position for any reason the State School
4 Superintendent appointed by the Board shall serve until the
5 Senate shall act concerning such person's confirmation.
6
I guess the problem I was worried with was in
7 between the time of appointment and ratification by the
8 Senate. It's not intended the term would expire on June 30th, 9 it's just intended the present Superintendent would stay in;
10 is that right?
zC)
11 toe-<
MR. HILL: Yes, that's right. The term until he's
Q.
12 ~ elected in '82 will serve until '84 -- no, '86 -- will serve
@ r l until 1986, at which time the State Board will appoint a
! 14 t-
replacement.
'"
::t:
15 q
C)
It's to grandfather in that elected official sothat
e<
:>
16
~ Q
his
term
is
not
shortened by
this
change,
and
that
person
z
17 :; would just serve until 1986, at which time there will be an
18 appointment of the new
19
In other words, if he dies? Is that what you were
20 thinking of? If the State School Superintendent dies or
21 resigns in the period between 1983 and 1986 what would happen
22 in that event?
23
I think in that case the person would be appointed
24 by the Board, then he would serve until the Senate met.
25
MR. VANN: Do you think we would have power to
PAGE 92
For instance. if we had a vacancy and there was
2 some -- you know. it could never be longer than a year. but
3 if there was approximately a year involved before the Senate
4 was in session. and I guess maybe nine months would be the
5 most -- well. subtract forty days -- during that period of
6 time would we have the authority to appoint sayan acting
7 superintendent. or --?
8
MR. HILL: It says to appoint a new one to serve
9 until the Senate shall have acted concerning his confirmation.
10
Czl 11 I-
9 ; ;'o<.".>.. ! 14 I'" J: 15 .:l Cl :':"> 16 .~.. Q Z 17 :
so that was the intention of that language to say you would
appoint him immediately in case of vacancy. and he would
serve until his confirmation. If he was confirmed. then he
serves --
MR. OWENS: Whatever time.
MR. HILL: Yes.
MRS. GRAHAM: Do we have any
MR. VANN: What about
Okay.
18
What happens when you appoint a Superintendent and
19 there's some element of time involved before the advise and
20 consent afthe Senate is obtained?
21
MR. HILL: The intention was they would appoint him
22 and he would hold office. he would hold that office until the
23 Senate confirmed him. and if the Senate didn't confirm him
24 then he would -- you know. that would be the end of his term.
25
That was the intention of this language. It may
PAGE 93
,
not be clear enough, but we had meant for that to happen.
2 In the case of a vacancy in this position for any reason the
3 Board appoints a new State School Superintendent to serve
4 until the Senate shall have acted.
.' ~
5
MR.. VANN: Okay.
6
MR.. OWENS: There's another -- in case a superin-
7 tendent dies or resigns in between there, there's not a
8 provision there that indicates how long he will serve. Will
9 he serve the~ if appointed for four years, or will he just
10
.."z
11 j:
.o..
12 ~
@Fi 14 .~.. ':~"z: ".15 01) ::> 16 ~... Q Z ~ 17 ::;
serve the balance of the term that the previous MR.. VANN: Apparently the Board could establish a
one-year term for a superintendent. MR.. VANN: If they did that, he would have to be
confirmed each time where they could establish up to a fouryear term and upon confirmation he could serve for four years, but then he would have to be submitted again or reconfirmed by the Senate at the end of four years.
18
MR.. OWENS: Are we speaking about a new person
19 coming in when a person has used up his term, but now you're
20 saying that this could be in any situation, whether he resigns
21 or dies or what in the middle of a term that he's already
22 serving, would a person serve out the balance of the term in "
23 which he was serving, the four-year period?
24
MR. HILL: It's all up to the State Board to decide
25 how long that person will serve. The only limitation is that
PAGE 94
that person cannot serve for more than four consecutive years,
2 without being reconfirmed by the Senate, so that a new
3 appointment could have up to a four-year term or just fill out
4 the remainder of the last person's term. It's strictly up to
5 the Board.
6
MR. VANN: I guess it's really language, I guess we
7 could eliminate the words "new State School Superintendent"
8 there, "In the case of a vacancy in such position for any
9 reason, the Board shall appoint a State School Superintendent
10 who shall serve until the Senate shall have acted."
l:J
Z
11 j:
."o..."..
MRS. GRAHAM: He would have to be new, though.
~ 12 ~
MR. VANN: He might.
~F~
Why am I having trouble with this language?
! 14 ...
MR. HILL: Ihink because you want him to be elected
'-"<
%
15 .:I
MRS. GRAHAM: It's encouraging to know I'm not alone
l:J
"=">
16 ~... when it comes to these things of appointed and elected .
Q
Z
-<
17 :
DR. PRESSLY: I agree with you, Tom. I don't think
18 we need the word "new."
19
MR. VANN: I would put in here if we had to change
20 that sentence in case of appointment or vacancy --
21
MR. FINDLEY: Excuse me. What it might try to be,
22 Mr. Vann, is that he serves until confirmed by the Senate;
23 read literally that would mean that after he was confirmed
24 he couldn't serve.
25
MR. OWENS: It has that implication.
PAGE 95
MR. FINDLEY: Perhaps the sentence ought to be
2 revamped. I don't think that construction would be possible'.
3 I think the construction that would be put on it is the
4 intended construction, but read literally when the Board
5 appoints to fill a vacancy he serves until he's confirmed.
6
MR. VANN: Perhaps the traditional language isn't
7 suitable in an appointment, I don't know, but ordinarily it's
8 to serve until his successor is appointed and qua]fied,
9
MRS. GRAHAM: Could we just delete the word "new,"
10
"z
11 i=
e ; i.'oQ"... 14 .~'<:"z: 15 ,:, ":'>" 16 ~... Q Z < 17 :
and would that correct it? MR. OWENS; It could be he would serve -MR. VANN: I had something, I can't pick it up now
what I had in mind as I read through it now, so I'm opposed to appointment and the rest of it is immaterial .
MRS. GRAHAM: Well, do you have a motion you want to make to clarify this, or does anyone else? Mel, Vickie, Dr. Pressly, Odell?
18
MS. GREENBERG: I think we can clean up that "Who
19 shall serve until," it will take a little bit of drafting
20 decision to clarify it.
21
MRS. GRAHAM: Mel and Vickie, what are your thoughts
22 or have you already discussed this in regard to another
23 subcommittee meeting? What did you decide at the last
24 meeting?
25
MR. HILL: In light of what has happened today --
PAGE 96
MR. VANN: Before we go, could I ask one other
2 question?
3
Do you also believe that removal is contained in
4 this? In other words, the power to -- is removal provided
5 for?
6
If we appoint him for a four-year term, for instance
7 do we have the power to provide how he can be removed?
8
MR. HILL: It probably should be stated.
9
You see, originally we had thought that we would say
10 that the State School Superintendent shall serve at the
1:1
..Z
11 j::
o......
~;I
pleasure of the Board, but we didn't feel that was what we wanted to do, because then perhaps the Board then couldn't have a contract with the man for a year, two years, and you
14 .~.. might not get the best qualified people, so we didn't want to
':"r
..15 otl preclude the possibility of a contract with the Board, so to 1:1
::>
16 .~.. say at the pleasure of we dismissed .
Q
Z
17 :
MR. VANN: You know, I have been involved in local
18 situations. Would you have to provide all the due process
19 things and all that to remove the State School Superintendent?
20
I kind of feel like that -- Well, you know, I'd
21 even be willing to say appointed with the advise and consent
22 of the Senate and remove the advise and consent of the Senate.
23 but I think there ought to be some type of removal.
24
MR. HILL: I think we should just add that into the
25 list, the Board may prescribe the qualifications, term of
PAGE 97
office, method of removal, duties --
2
MR. VANN: Okay, If removal is not in here, I
3 think it ought to be in here, but if it's in here --
4
MRS. GRAHAM: Okay, Does anyone else have any
5 more recommenations or suggestions?
6
Mel, you were discussing about the subcommittee and
7 whether or not we needed another meeting.
8
MR. HILL: In light of our discussicm about
9 Section I and Section II, and the need for some new draft,
10
"z
11 ~
.'o."....
~ 12 ~
~ri 14 ~ I'::"c 15 ~ "'="> 16 .~.. zo 17 :
a new draft, I would propose you do meet one more time as a subcommittee, and I would recommend perhaps the first week of September, the first or second week of September as a possibility.
MR. OWENS: What's that date? MR. VANN: The first week of September MR. OWENS: Labor Day would be on Monday . MR. HILL: We have a meeting the 2nd -- we don't
18 have a meeting on the 2nd. I don't know if you would want to
19 meet thel day after Labor Day.
20
MRS. GRAHAM: What's the pleasure of the committee?
21 Tuesday, the 2nd?
22
DR. PRESSLY: That woUd suit me fine.
23
MR. VANN: I prefer not to. You know, that's
24 another day out of the office after being out of the office
25 on a holiday.
PAGE 98
MR. HILL: The following week, Monday the 8th?
2
MRS. GRAHAM: I can't come that day.
3
MR. VANN: The State Board of Education meets on the
4 10th and the 11th.
5
MR. HILL: How about next~ek then, what about the
6 week of the 25th? I don't think we have much more to
7 conclude here.
8
We have a meeting on Thursday, but we're free
9 Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday.
10
MR. VANN: Would it be possible to meet on the
..'z"
11 j: afternoon of September the 11th?
.o.....
9 2j MRS. GRAHAM: How late would you think that meeting might last on the 8th?
! 14 t-
MR. HILL: The 8th. I don't think it will last
UI
:r
..15 ~ very long. CI
;;;)
16 .~..
MR. OWENS: What day is the 11th?
Q
Z
17 :
MR. VANN: It's on Thursday.
18
MR. HILL: We have a meeting that day, that's a bad
19 day.
20
MS. GREENBERG: What about next-week, the 25th
21 through the 29th?
22
DR. PRESSLY: Just so it's over in the latter part
23 of it. I can't do it the early part.
24
MR. HILL: Either Wednesday or Friday of nextleek.
25
MR. VANN: I don't know, I'd just really have to
PAGE 99
check on my calendar, I can't recall, It seems to me like
2 there's some type of meeting on the Public Telecommunications
3 Task Force that's meeting in that week some time, and I'm --
4
MS. GREENBERG: It shouldn't be a long meeting if we
5 get the proper language drafted. It's a matter of just
6
MR. HILL: The 8th, is that all right with
7 everyone?
8
MR. VANN: How about the afternoon of the 9th?
9
MR. HILL: That's all right with us. Tuesday
10 afternoon, the 9th.
9 ; ;"z 11 i= <..o..I..t
MR. VANN:
afternoon?
MR. HILL:
What time are you talking about Tuesday 1:30 or 2:00 o'clock. What about 2:00
! 14 o'clock on the 9th?
I-
'"
:z:
15 ~
MR. VANN: What time are you saying?
"<It
::>
16 ~...
MR. HILL: 2:00 o'clock on the 9th~
Q
Z
17 :;
MR. OWENS: I'll try it.
18
MR. HILL: 2:00 o'clock on the 9th.
19
DR. PRESSLY: It suits me all right, two o'clock on
20 the 9th.
21
MRS. GRAHAM: I was just thinking, I have to take
22 our daughter to Mercer on the 6th, and I was thinking if we
23 went ahead and met on the 8th that I might be able to just do
24 all that in one trip instead of going back to St. Simons and
25 coming back again.
PAGE 100
MR. OWENS: On the 6th?
2
MRS. GRAHAM: The 8th. We have a board of education
3 meeting that night, and I do have to get back for that.
4
MR. OWENS: On the 8th?
5
MRS. GRAHAM: Yes.
6
MR. OWENS: What date are you suggesting now?
7
MRS. GRAHAM: The morning of the 8th, or I can meet
8 on the 9th, whichever one ismore convenient.
9
MR. VANN: It's difficult. I have the same type of
10 problem on the 8th.
MRS. GRAHAM: Is it agreeable with everybody on the
9th?
MR. OWENS: I'm going to try. That sounds more
agreeable than the morning of the 8th. I believe I can make
it on the 9th.
MRS. :GRAHAM: Raise your hand if everybody agrees
to the 9th.
18
MR. OWENS: I'm going to agree to it.
19
MRS. GRAHAM: I think you should check this out
20 also, Mel, if you would.
21
MR. HILL: We'll have to check with everybody, but
22 we're agreeable on two o'clock on the 9th, with the backup
23 of the 8th in the morning?
24
How about the 10th, then? We should have a backup
25 date. Either the 9th at two or the 10th at 2:00?
PAGE 101
MRS. GRAHAM: No, I can't come on the 10th, that's
2 my anniversary. The 8th or 9th.
3
MR. VANN: Why don't we say the 9th?
4
MR. HILL: The 9th at two unless the chairman can't
5 make it, then we'll just have to get in touch with you and see
6 what we can do.
7
DR. PRESSLY: All right.
8
MR. HILL: Okay.
9
(Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m. the subcommittee meeting
to was adj ourned )
"z
11 IIll:
@;;.~.. ! 14 I'~" % 15 0:1 "Ill: :> 16 .~.. g Z ~ 17 :
+++ ++ +
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j
INDEX Committee to Revise Article VIII Subcommittee Meeting Held on Aug. 18, 1980
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, 8-18-80
Proceedings. pp. 3-4
SECTION I: PUBLIC EDUCATION
Paragraph I:
Public education; free public education prior to college or postsecondary level; support by taxation. pp. 4-41, 44-46
(Equal educational opportunity and equal protection.)
SECTION II: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Paragraph I: State Board of Education. pp. 41-88
Appointment, qualifications, filling of vacancies. pp. 41-44, 46-68
Powers and duties of Board. pp. 68-77, 89
Enforcement of minimum educational standards. pp. 75, 78-85
Vocational technical education. pp. 76, 85-88
Grants, donations, bequests. pp. 76-78
SECTION III: Paragraph I:
STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT
State school superintendent. (Appointment)
pp. 62-68, 89-97