►
From YouTube: 2/23/2021 - Assembly Committee on Education
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
C
D
A
A
Before
we
begin
I'd
like
to
make
a
few
housekeeping
notes,
if
you
haven't
done
so
already,
please
make
sure
you
mute
your
microphones
when
you're,
not
speaking
so
it
minimizes
background
noise.
Many
members,
please
keep
your
cameras
on
for
the
duration
of
the
meeting,
so
we
can
ensure
that
a
quorum
is
present.
We
do
expect
courtesy
and
respect
in
this
committee.
A
We
don't
always
agree
on
policy,
but
we
need
to
be
respectful
to
each
other
in
the
legislative
process,
reminder
to
folks
that
our
meeting
materials
can
be
accessed
on
the
committee's
web
page
and
nellis
and
a
reminder
for
those
watching
online
in
this
virtual
world.
We
do
have
several
screens
going
on
at
once.
So
if
you
see
members
looking
away
they're
looking
at
materials
for
the
committee
on
one
of
their
many
devices
so
remarks
for
our
hearing,
we
have
two
bill
hearings.
A
This
afternoon
I
have
allocated
equal
time
for
testimony
and
support
opposition
in
neutral
to
be
specific.
Each
person
providing
testimony
will
be
allowed
of
maximum
two
minutes
staff
will
time
each
speaker
to
ensure
everyone
is
given
an
equal
opportunity
to
speak.
Speakers
are
urged
to
avoid
repetition
of
comments
made
by
previous
speakers.
We
love
ditto
or
the
person
just
said
exactly
what
I
wanted
to
say.
We
will
limit
the
overall
length
of
each
testimony
to
30
minutes
if
you
wish
to
testify
and
have
not
done
so
already.
A
Please
register
online
through
the
link
provided
on
the
agenda
for
the
meeting
upon
successful
registration,
you'll
receive
the
telephone
number
meeting
id
and
instructions
for
joining
the
meeting.
So
we
have
an
accurate
record
account.
We
ask
that
you
do
not
share
this
information,
but
instead
encourage
to
ask
others
to
also
register
online
to
participate.
A
If
you
do
not
want
to
testify,
you
may
still
register
your
opinion
on
a
particular
bill
through
our
website.
You
may
also
submit
public
comment
in
writing
either.
In
addition,
or
in
lieu
of
testifying,
the
chair
or
members
of
the
committee
may
request
testifiers
to
submit
documentation
supporting
their
testimony,
so
we
are
going
to
go
out
of
order,
we're
going
to
hear
sb,
83
forced
so
I'm
going
to
open
the
hearing
for
sb
83.
A
E
E
The
bill
before
you
today
comes
as
a
recommendation
from
the
interim
legislative
commit
committee
on
education,
lce
that
had
the
that
I
had
the
pleasure
to
serve
as
vice
chair
of
the
lce.
Alongside
with
several
colleagues
on
this
committee,
including
assemblywoman
miller,
who
served
as
the
chair
some
of
the
women
garlow
and
assemblywoman
tolls,
it's
nice
to
see
everybody,
even
though
we're
still
virtual,
but
I
would
like
to
be
first
begin
with
some
brief
background
information.
That
explains
what
led
to
this
recommendation.
E
Due
to
the
shifts
to
the
remote
learning
resulted
from
the
coronavirus
disease
of
2019
pandemic.
On
march
20th
2020,
the
united
states
department
of
education
announced
it
would
it
would
allow
states
to
submit
a
waiver
from
federally
mandated
testing
and
other
requirements
for
the
school
year
2019-2020.
E
On
the
same
day,
nevada's
department
of
education
announced
it
had
submitted
the
waiver
request
to
the
usdoe,
and
it
was
later
approved
in
september
2020.
The
us
secretary
of
education
indicated
no
additional
waivers
would
be
granted
to
states
for
twenty
twenty
twenty
two
one.
Until
yesterday,
the
current
administration
had
not
yet
given
additional
guidance
on
this
matter.
E
On
february
twenty
second,
twenty
twenty
one,
the
u.s
department
of
education
provided
guidance
to
the
state's
maintaining
that,
while
the
agency
will
not
be
waiving
federally
mandated
exams
this
year,
the
usdoe
is
offering
flexibilities
in
ministering
those
tests
and
the
use
of
testing
results.
E
So,
with
that
background
in
mind,
because
my
testimony
just
changed
overnight
because
of
the
the
fed,
I
will
now
explain
what
sb
83
does
sb
83
authorizes
nde
to
temporarily
waive
or
pause
the
requirements
to
administer
certain
federally
required
examinations
that
measure
the
achievement
and
proficiency
of
students.
If
the
usdoe
allows
for
such
a
waiver
or
pause
if
such
a
waiver
is
allowed,
section
1
of
the
bill
also
authorized
nde
to
temporarily
waive
or
pause
certain
reporting
requirements
based
on
assessments.
Result
assessment
results
measuring
student
achievement
and
proficiency.
E
While
we
know
the
usdoe
has
indicated,
it
will
not
provide
for
blanket
waivers
from
assessments
this
school
year,
as
was
done
last
year.
There
are
still
a
couple
reasons
why
this
bill
is
needed.
One.
The
legislation
would
allow
the
opportunity
to
provide
such
waivers
should
a
similar
need
arise
in
the
future
and
two
the
bill
would
give
the
state
the
ability
to
provide
for
the
waivers
if
the
usdoe
changes
its
guidance
on
this
matter
for
this
school
year.
E
A
Thank
you
senator
dennis,
and
you
read
my
mind
because
I
was
going
to
mention
to
committee
members
that
we
do
have
dr
moore
and
I
I
believe
that
dr
moore
might
want
to
get
on
the
record
some
issues
that
we
we
are
anticipating
with
the
federal
guidelines.
A
So,
dr
mora,
I'm
going
to
turn
the
floor
over
to
you.
If
you
want
to
put
anything
on
the
record
in
regards
to
to
that.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
senator
dennis
dr
jonathan
moore
for
the
record
just
to
reiterate
what
senator
dennis
shared
during
his
testimony.
The
united
states
department
of
education
did
issue
guidance
on
yesterday
regarding
the
accountability
and
school
identification
and
the
state's
ability
to
apply
for
a
waiver
in
that
area.
They
also
did
note
guidance
regarding
the
administration
of
assessments.
A
Thank
you
so
much,
and
I
also
would
ask
at
this
time,
if
our
legal
counsel
would
chime
in,
I
think,
there's
some
confusions.
With
regards
to
the
annual
report
of
accountability
section
in
relations
to
the
federal
guidelines.
So
amanda,
could
you
take
that
if
that's
okay.
D
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
amanda
marita
committee
council.
So
just
to
clarify
section
one
of
ab38,
I
believe
or
883,
I'm
sorry.
I
got
some
quick
stuff
so
section
one
authorizes
the
department
of
education
to
temporarily
waive
or
pause
your
requirement
to
administer
examinations,
and
if
those
examinations
are
waived
or
paused,
they
don't
have
to
report
that
information
in
their
report
of
accountability.
A
A
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
senator
dennis
it's
it's
good
to
see
you
a
question,
so
it
what
we
just
went
over
in
section
one.
It
would
authorize
nde
to
waive
or
pause,
but
not
have
to
report
the
information.
D
E
F
Thank
you
assemblywoman
for
the
question,
dr
jonathan
moore,
for
the
record.
So,
according
to
the
guidance
released
by
the
federal
government,
the
waiver
that
has
yet
to
been
released
would
allow
for
estates
to
not
implement
or
report
the
results
of
its
accountability.
B
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation,
senator
and
dr
moore.
I
really
appreciate
it
and
my
question
is
with
regards
to
like
a
star
rating
for
schools:
will
they
be
impacted
by
this
or
will
does
it?
Is
this
permissive
language?
Is
the
language
in
this
bill
permissive
enough
so
that
they
will
not
necessarily
be
impacted
by
the
scores
that
they
receive
on
those
assessments.
E
The
senator
dennis
this
does
not
impact
the
to
my
understanding.
The
the
bill
doesn't
address
that
issue
at
all
as
far
as
the
star
rating
system,
but
dr
moore
can
confirm
that.
F
B
A
clarification
question
upon
me
sure
so.
Currently
the
nde
already
has
the
capacity
and
the
ability
to
do
that
to
freeze
that,
and
this
bill
just
allows
for
them
to
continue
that
isn't
going
to
touch
that,
but
they're
they'll
be
able
to
if
the
superintendent
and
their
office
deemed
it
necessary
for
this
year.
F
So,
under
the
guidance
excuse
me,
thank
you
assemblywoman
for
the
question,
dr
jonathan.
More
for
the
record.
Under
the
most
recent
guidance
from
the
united
states
department
of
education,
each
state
that
were
to
receive
the
accountability
and
school
identification
waiver
would
be
required
to
report
support.
Excuse
me
all
of
the
previously
identified
schools
in
our
case
from
the
2018
school
year.
A
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
and
I'm
just
going
to
go
back
to
assemblywoman
hanson's
question
and
if
I
could
have
legal
jump
in
on
that,
my
understanding
was
that
we
would
have
that
information
available
to
us,
even
though
it's
not
being
reported
to
the
feds,
but
we
would
have
it
for
our
own
internal
information
as
a
state.
Is
that
correct.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
amanda,
merced
committee
council,
that
is
in
part,
correct.
The
federal
waiver,
I
believe,
only
applies
to
us
reported
to
the
government.
We
still
collect
that
information
subsection
two
of
section,
one
specifically
authorizes
the
department.
If
a
waiver
is
in
place
from
the
federal
government
relating
to
the
assessments
to
not
include
the
assessment
examination
information
in
the
report,
because
those
examinations
wouldn't
have
been
administered,
so
they
wouldn't
have
that
information
to
include.
A
Thank
you
for
that
clarification.
Do
I
have
any
other
questions
from
the
committee
okay
scene?
None.
We
will
move
on
to
hear
testimony
in
support
opposition
and
neutral
of
sb
83.
Please
remember
to
clearly
state
and
spell
your
name
and
limit
your
testimony
as
close
to
two
minutes
as
possible.
A
I
J
J
J
We
further
believe
sd
83
should
be
admitted
to
ask
the
us
department
of
education
to
reconsider
their
decision
yesterday,
not
to
offer
waivers
from
the
testing
requirements
this
school
year.
High-Tech
standardized
tests
administered
during
the
global
health
crisis
should
not
determine
a
student's
future,
evaluate
educators
or
punish
schools,
nor
should
they
come
at
the
expense
of
precious
learning
time
that
students
could
be
spending
with
their
educators.
J
Over-Testing
has
been
a
long-standing
concern
of
classroom
educators,
as
decades
of
standardized
tests
have
shifted
the
focus
in
education,
away
from
student
learning
toward
a
culture
of
high
stakes
testing
over
the
last
two
sessions,
nsca
worked
with
these
committees
in
the
legislature
reduced
the
burden
of
standardized
testing
on
our
students
and
educators.
This
included
helping
to
pass
a
2017
bill
from
former
senator
woodhouse
to
audit
and
streamline
the
amount
of
time
and
resources
spent
on
state
tests,
while
small
changes
have
been
made
over
the
last
several
years.
J
The
current
crisis
calls
for
more
substantive
overall
state
testing
requirements
have
consistently
expressed
our
concern
that
existing
policy
on
student
assessments,
teacher
evaluations
and
school
star
ratings
compromise
the
safe
operation
of
schools
during
the
turbine
19
crisis.
These
mechanisms
have
failed
to
foster
the
improvements
in
either
achievement
or
student
engagement.
There
deliver
with
a
continued
reliance
on
these
old
schemes.
Students
and
educators
have
counter-incentives
to
come
to
school
when
sick,
to
teach
the
tests
instead
of
teaching
and
reinforcing
health
and
safety
and
to
maximize
numbers
and
time
in
classrooms.
Even.
K
J
Be
outside
of
health
and
safety
guidelines,
further
drastic
improvement
and
testing
results
during
the
most
difficult
school
year,
like
the
math
reading
results
in
early
grades
this
past
year
highlight
just
how
ridiculous
it
is
to
conduct
these
tests
during
the
pandemic.
J
This
school
year,
educators
across
the
state,
have
responded
in
a
diversity
of
ways,
depending
on
their
district,
the
status
of
the
health
crisis
in
their
communities
with
districts
failing
their
response
to
meet
unique
challenges
they
face
in
their
own
communities
the
state's
one-size-fits-all
approach
to
standardized
tests.
This
is
the
mark
of
this
moment.
Suspension
of
elaborate
sorting
rating
mechanisms,
including
federal
state,
discriminative
assessments,
is
the
smart
thing
to
do.
Thank
you.
I
G
Thank
you
committee
and
chairwoman,
bilberry
axelrod,
my
name
is
hava
h-a-w-a-h
ahmad
a-h-m-a-d,
and
I
am
here
representing
the
clark
county
education
association.
The
clark
county
education
association
represents
more
than
18
000
licensed
professionals
in
the
clark
county
school
district.
We
are
the
largest
independent
teachers
union
in
the
country
and
in
the
state
of
nevada.
We
engage
in
bipartisan
advocacy
for
advancing
public
education
in
nevada.
G
Students
across
nevada
have
experienced
distance
education
for
nearly
a
full
year,
and
many
of
these
students
have
experienced
inconsistent
engagement
and
learning.
Nevada
must
be
responsive
to
the
needs
of
nevada's
students
to
minimize
the
impact
of
educational
inequities
that
have
been
exacerbated
by
the
kobit
19
pandemic.
A
pause
or
waiver
of
standardized
testing,
in
accordance
with
federal
guidelines,
may
help
our
educators
put
students,
skill
development
at
the
forefront
of
their
education,
to
ensure
that
every
student
has
an
opportunity
to
enter
the
workforce
or
to
continue
their
education.
G
I
I
D
Begin
you,
madam
chair,
and
for
the
record,
my
name
is
mary
prezzinski.
D
M-A-R-Y-P-I-E-R-C-V-Y-N-S-K-I,
representing
nevada
association
of
school
superintendents,
an
organization
composed
of
all
17
superintendents,
and
we
realized
that
there
have
been
some
changes
by
the
u.s
department
of
education
yesterday,
but
we
are
in
support
of
this
bill.
We
supported
it
in
front
of
the
senate
and
we're
still
in
support.
Thank
you.
A
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
senator
dennis
did
you
have
any
closing
remarks
for
sb
83.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
just
as
I
mentioned,
because
you
know
the
initial
need
for
this
came
because
of
the
pandemic
that
we're
in
today,
but
by
putting
this
in
law,
this
will
allow
for
us
to
be
able
to
respond
in
the
future.
Should
we
ever
have
this
need
again.
So
that's
why
we're
moving
forward.
So
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
come
before
you
and
present
the
bill
thanks.
A
L
Thank
you,
chair,
bilbray,
axelrod
good
afternoon
and
for
the
record
rebecca
feiden
executive
director
of
the
state
public
charter
school
authority.
I
also
have
with
me
ryan
herrick
our
general
counsel
and
tambry
tondrick,
who
is
the
executive
director
of
beacon
academy,
which
is
one
of
our
sponsored
schools.
You'll
hear
from
ms
tondrick
briefly
at
the
end
of
our
presentation
for
this
hearing
we've
provided
you
with
a
brief
one
page
overview
of
this
bill,
and
my
presentation
will
follow
the
outline
of
that
one
page
document
assembly
bill
68
does
three
main
things.
L
The
review
process
for
a
new
charter
school
application
includes
evaluation
against
the
spcsa's
application
rubric.
A
capacity
interview
and
soliciting
input
from
the
local
school
district.
Section
1
of
assembly
bill
68
proposes
extending
that
timeline
for
action
on
new
school
applications
from
60
to
120
days.
This
will
ensure
sufficient
time
for
a
robust
review,
including
input
from
our
local
school
districts.
L
As
you're
aware
charter
schools
are
subject
to
a
performance,
contract
and
statute
includes
two
contract
termination
provisions.
One
of
the
provisions
is
mandatory
in
which
the
sponsor
such
as
the
state
public
charter
school
authority,
has
no
discretion.
The
other
is
permissive
and
outline
circumstances
where
the
sponsor
may
terminate
a
charter
contract
and
close
the
school.
L
This
bill,
specifically
sections
four
and
five,
propose
that
both
termination
statutes
are
able
to
be
applied
to
a
specific
campus
or
grade
levels.
If
there
are
variations
in
performance
to
be
clear,
when
we
say
grade
levels,
we
typically
mean
the
elementary
middle
or
high
school
portion
of
a
school.
L
As
you
know,
some
charter
school
contracts
cover
multiple
campuses,
such
as
the
pinecrest
or
matter
schools
in
southern
nevada
and
in
some
charter
contracts
cover
an
entire
k-12
program,
elementary
middle
and
high
school.
This
change
would
allow
the
sponsor
to
target
the
closure
to
a
campus
or
grade
span
of
a
school
again.
The
elementary
middle
or
high
school
portion
that
is
persistently
underperforming,
rather
than
be
bound
to
act
on
either
all
or
none
of
the
campuses
or
grade
stands
under
that
charter
contract.
L
L
More
specifically,
in
order
to
qualify
to
be
rated
under
the
apf
at
least
75
percent
of
students
have
to
meet
one
or
more
of
the
following
criteria.
Having
been
expelled
or
suspended
from
a
public
school
having
been
deemed
a
habitual
disciplinary
problem
are
academically
disadvantaged,
which
is
defined
as
two
years
behind
in
grades
k
through
eight
or
more
than
a
year
behind,
in
terms
of
credits
to
matriculate
in
high
school,
be
under
court
supervision
or
have
an
individual's
individualized
education
program.
L
There
are
currently
30
schools
approved
by
the
state
board
of
education
to
be
rated
on
the
apf,
and
most
of
them
are
district
schools.
However,
there
are
three
charter
schools
currently
rated
on
the
apf,
and
one
is
an
spcsa
sponsored
charter,
school
beacon,
academy.
The
other
two
are
district
sponsored
charters.
L
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
there
are
two
contract
termination
statutes,
one
mandatory
and
one
permissive.
The
mandatory
statute
requires
the
sponsor
to
terminate
a
contract
for
a
school
that
earns
three
one-star
ratings
within
a
five-year
period
for
any
typical
school.
This
makes
sense,
however,
for
an
alternative
performance
framework
school,
particularly
one
like
beacon
that
serves
severely
credit
deficient
students.
A
one-star
rating
may
not
tell
the
whole
story.
L
In
fact,
that
is
why
they're
on
the
alternative
performance
framework
to
be
able
to
be
rated
with
additional
indicators
that
shed
light
on
other
measures
of
performance,
so
assembly
bill,
68
proposes
to
exempt
apf
schools
from
the
mandatory
termination
statute.
To
be
clear,
a
sponsor
could
still
close
a
apf
school
through
the
permissive
termination
statutes
that
these
schools
would
continue
to
be
subject
to.
L
The
final
change
proposed
in
related
to
apf
schools
has
to
do
with
the
contract
amendments.
A
charter
can
request
a
contract
amendment
for
a
variety
of
reasons,
for
example,
to
increase
enrollment
change
locations
or
add
a
campus.
Existing
statute
requires
the
sponsor
to
deny
certain
amendment.
Requests
due
to
poor
performance
ab68
would
exempt
apf
schools
from
the
required
denial
of
the
amendment
request
to
be
clear.
Our
board
still
has
discretion
on
amendments
and
can
still
deny
these
requests.
This
change
would
simply
exempt
these
schools
from
the
requirement
to
deny
those
certain
amendment
requests.
L
Ultimately,
both
of
these
provisions
related
to
apf
schools
would
allow
a
sponsor
to
honor
the
alternative
performance
performance
framework
data
and
not
rely
solely
on
the
star
rating
for
those
schools
that
are
approved
by
the
state
board
of
education
to
be
rated
on
the
apf.
That
covers
the
contents
of
this
bill.
To
provide
a
bit
of
insight
into
what
an
apf
charter
school
looks
like.
We've
asked
tambry
tondrick
the
executive
executive
director
of
beacon
academy
to
provide
a
brief
overview
of
her
school,
and
I
believe
she
is
on
the
line
and
prepared
to
speak.
K
Thank
you
rebecca
good
afternoon,
child
chair,
bilbray,
axelrod
members
of
the
education
committee.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
K
I
am
tambry
tondrick
executive
director
of
operations
for
beacon,
academy
of
nevada,
the
only
state
public
charter,
alternative
education,
high
school
beacon
academy
is
dedicated
to
serving
students
who
are
16
years
of
age
or
older
and
meet
one
or
more
of
the
alternative
education.
Enrollment
criteria
found
in
nrs
385a
740.
this
year.
K
98.4
of
the
students
enrolled
with
beacon
are
alternative
education
students,
78.3
percent
of
these
students
are
credit,
deficient
12.8
percent
are
adjudicated
expelled
or
suspended.
25.6
percent
are
special
education,
students
and
16.7
percent
qualify
under
multiple
conditions.
The
severity
and
at-risk
nature
of
the
student
population
requires
a
highly
personalized
innovative
program
designed
for
older
high
school
students.
K
beacon,
enrolls
students
through
the
age
of
21
for
general
education
and,
if
they're,
a
special
education
student,
they
can
remain
enrolled
until
the
age
of
22.,
because
most
alternative
education
students
have
not
experienced
success
in
school.
They
have
a
general
mistrust
of
school
staff
and
administration.
K
With
time
and
effort,
the
beacon
staff
is
able
to
change
these
negative
perceptions,
attitudes
and
beliefs
about
public
schools.
The
mind
shift
occurs
through
efforts
of
the
school
social
workers,
counselors
administration
teachers
and
support
staff.
The
new
students
are
made
to
feel,
welcome
and
encouraged
to
leave
their
academic
history
at
the
door.
We
try
to
give
them
a
fresh
start,
a
do-over
we
recognize
where
they
come
from
and
help
them
overcome
their
challenges
and
barriers
to
help
students
realize
their
goals.
K
Our
staff
is
very
specialized.
They
truly
care
about
the
special
population
and
work
hard
to
build
trusting
relationships.
Every
student
is
supported
by
a
school
social
worker
and
a
teacher
and
provided
an
academic
schedule.
Individualized
for
them,
our
in
our
innovative
blended
learning
program,
places
equal
emphasis
on
the
social,
emotional
and
academic
needs
of
our
students
and
provides
numerous
mission-specific
programs
and
incentives
and
interventions.
K
We
work
with
our
students
to
set
short
and
long-term
goals
because
it's
very
difficult
to
keep
this
over
age
student
engaged
in
high
school,
so
working
with
them
short
term
you're,
going
to
earn
two
credits
this
term
working
towards
that
long-term
goal
of
graduation.
Real-Time
grade
report
trackers.
So
we
look
at
the
grades
daily
so
that
we
know
which
students
are
falling
behind
and
help
them
in
those
classes,
and
we
have
several
rti
facilitators
response
to
intervention.
We
have
math
literacy
and
science.
K
I'm
pleased
to
report
that
we've
had
20
students,
27
students
graduate
so
far
this
year,
five
of
them
from
cohort
2018
10
from
cohort
2019,
seven
from
2020
and
five
from
2021
18
of
27
graduates
enrolled
with
beacon
in
their
fourth
or
fifth
year
of
high
school
proposed
changes
to
assembly
bill
68
are
important
for
our
school,
since
we
are
rated
under
the
alternative
performance
framework
which
is
designed
for
schools
just
like
beacon.
We
serve
a
very
highly
at-risk
student
population,
the
apf
measures
they
use
different
measures
such
as
academic
progress
towards
graduation.
K
A
Thank
you
very
much.
We
will
open
it
up
for
questions
so
stand
by,
and
I'm
just
going
to
remind
you
if
you
are
called
on
for
a
question
if
you
could
state
your
name
for
the
record,
it
just
helps
with
our
committee
secretaries,
who
have
to
keep
an
accurate
record.
It's
not
something
that
we
normally
are
used
to
doing.
So
I
just
if
I
remind
you,
I
it's
okay,
but
just
something
to
keep
keep
in
mind.
So
I
know
I
have
one
question
from
vice
chair
miller:
by
show
of
hands.
M
You
chair
my
question
on
the
bill
is
in
regards
to
section
4
item
6..
It
states
that
if
the
sponsor
of
a
charter
school
determines
that
not
all
of
the
grade
levels
in
or
campuses
of
the
charter
school
meet,
the
criteria
based
in
subsection,
1
and
the
charter
school
can
remain
financially
viable.
M
If
the
charter
school
continues
to
operate
and
serve
only
the
grade
levels
or
campuses
which
do
not
meet
the
criteria,
the
sponsor
may
amend
the
charter
contract
to
eliminate
the
grade
levels
or
campuses
director
fighting
did
explain
that
that
it
would
be
to
the
option
to
close
whole
campuses,
or,
I
should
say,
a
campus
if
there
were
five
schools
and
one
was
underperforming
according
to
the
criteria
here.
But
I
have.
I
have
concerns
over
the
ability
to
pick
and
choose
certain
grade
levels
to
close
within
a
school.
M
M
It's
much
more
fluid,
so
if
one
grade
level
is
underperforming,
there's
a
lot
of
strategy
strategies
that
can
be
implored
to
bring
them
up
and,
what's
concerning
to
me,
is
this
bill
doesn't
say
anything
about.
If
the
certain
grade
levels
are
underperforming
strategies
that
will
be,
you
know,
implored
or
goals
that
will
be
set.
M
So
if
we
don't
have
enough,
you
know
11th
or
12th
graders
enrolled,
we
don't
have
enough
first
graders
in
world,
wouldn't
it
just
be
more
financially
viable,
as
the
bill
says
to
just
eliminate
those
grades,
and
so
I
guess
my
first
question
is:
how
will
we,
if
the
bills
pass
written,
how
will
we
guarantee
that
those
types
of
those
those
types
of
decisions
aren't
made
and
also,
why
is
it
made
just
based
on
what's
financially
viable
for
the
charter
school.
L
Rebecca
fighting
for
the
record
executive
director
of
the
state
public
charter
school
authority.
Thank
you
vice
chair
miller,
for
the
question.
So
first
I'll
just
point
back
to
section
4.1,
which
talks
about
three
out
of
five
star
ratings
and,
as
you
all
familiar
star,
ratings
are
done
on
the
elementary
middle
and
high
school
level.
So
you
know,
while
it
says
grade
levels,
I
want
to
be
clear
that
we
use
that
language,
because
that
was
already
in
the
following
section:
nrs388
a330.
L
So
we
borrowed
that
language
that
had
already
been
embedded
there.
But
again,
if
we're
talking
about
a
star
rating
and
a
point
to
the
language
again
in
4.6
that
says
that
not
all
of
the
grade
levels
or
campuses
meet
the
criteria.
Well,
an
elementary
is
going
to
meet
or
not
meet
the
criteria
because
of
the
star
rating.
A
middle
school
will
meet
or
not
meet
because
of
the
star
rating.
L
So
again,
the
use
of
grade
levels
is
just
because
there's
not
typically
terminology
for
like
elementary
middle
high,
although
we
could
certainly
work
to
clarify
that
if
it
would
be
helpful
to
your
other
question
around
the
language
on
financial
viability
to
be
clear,
this
is
action
that
the
sponsor
can
take.
The
school
cannot
take
this
action.
The
sponsor
can
take
this
action
and
it
is
only
an
action
that
could
be
taken
as
an
alternative
to
full,
fully
terminating
a
charter
contract.
L
So
the
reason
financial
viability
is
brought
into
play
is
because
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
to
look
at.
In
addition,
academic
performance
is
compliance
and
financial
viability.
So
when
we
are
considering
you
know
it,
okay,
we've
got
an
elementary
middle
and
high.
The
elementary
and
middle
are
not
working,
but
the
high
school
is
let's
keep
the
high
school.
We'd
have
to
be
sure
that
that
high
school
by
itself
could
be
financially
viable
before
deeming
this
to
be
a
meaningful
pathway
forward.
L
The
last
thing
we
want
to
do
is
keep
a
school
open
to
then
not
have
a
financial
pathway
to
be
successful.
So
I
hope
that
gives
a
little
context
and
then
the
last
thing
I
do
want
to
just
touch
on
is
you
mentioned
improvement,
and
I
I
do
want
to
just
be
abundantly
clear
that
we
closing
a
charter
school
is
while
it
is
an
important
accountability
tool,
our
goal
is
not
to
have
to
close
any
schools.
L
L
That's
why
we
have
schools
come
and
speak
in
front
of
our
board
when
there
is
underperformance
and
put
forth
improvement
plans.
So
there
are
many
many
things
that
happen
along
the
way
to
help
prevent
this
scenario
again.
This
is
not
something
we
want
to
do,
but
it
is
part
of
the
deal
if
the
school
is
underperforming
consistently.
It
is
you
know,
kind
of
that
last
step
in
the
process,
so
vice
chair
miller.
I
hope
that
answers
your
question,
but
certainly
happy
to
share
additional
information.
As
I
can
follow-up.
M
Chair
absolutely
director
it
it
does
in
a
sense,
but
I
guess
I'm
still
trying
to
get
some
clarity
around
the
ability,
as
you
mentioned,
that
the
distinction
between
you
know
we're
really
talking
about
groupings
of
elementary
middle
and
high
school,
and
so
that
being
said,
we
also
know
that
within
that
grouping,
if
I'm
looking
at
elementary
school
and
I'm
looking
at
the
star
rating
for
our
elementary
schools,
I
can
also
still
extrapolate
from
that
that
oh
look,
it's
our
third
grade
or
our
fourth
grade,
that's
bringing
our
scores
down
and
ultimately
impacting
this
star
rating.
M
So
at
that
point
I
can
say
well,
it's
you
know,
third
grade
they're,
the
ones
that
are
bringing
down
our
our
our
scores
and
we
still
want
to
be
able
to
have
high
scores.
We
don't
want
to
risk
having
you
know
getting
the
star
rating
number
one
again,
so
why
don't
we
just
eliminate
grade
three,
and
then
you
know
what
the
problem's
kind
of
over
I
will
see.
Our
our
scores
go
up
our
star
rating
increases,
and
now
we
just
don't
have
to
deal
with
that
grade
level.
M
So
what
kind
of
guardrails
do
we
have
in
place
so
that
that
doesn't
happen
because
otherwise,
it
just
seems
like
you
know,
let
let's
just
let's
just
eliminate
the
grade
or
grades,
because
they're
underperforming
and
and
and
it
also
kind
of
begs
to
the
question,
then,
if
we
have
grades,
if
we
need
to
start
cutting
out
grades,
then
is
it
again
ultimately
a
systemic
issue
at
the
school.
L
Fine
for
the
record,
I
just
want
to
be
abundantly
clear.
The
intent
is
not
to
cut
out
of
third
grade
or
second
grade
like
that
is
absolutely
not
the
intent
behind
what
we've
put
together
here.
So
if
we
can
clarify
this,
my
understanding
from
our
council
is
that
there
might
be
some
language
in
388
that
speaks
to
types
of
schools
elementary
middle
high.
L
So
I'm
happy
to
include
some
language
that
clarifies
that
if
that
would
address
your
concern,
but
again
absolutely
not
the
intent
here,
and
it
is
action
that
the
sponsor
would
be
taking
not
the
school
taking.
So
you
know
this
is
part
of
our
oversight
and
accountability,
and
then
I
believe
you
asked
the
second
part
of
the
question,
but
chair
miller
I
apologize
if
I
forgot.
The
second
part,
would
you
remind
me.
M
I
yeah,
I
think
it
was
just
to
again
those
guard
were:
oh,
no,
I'm
sorry.
The
second
part
was
about,
then
the
questions
of
if
we
do
have
to
shut
a
grade
level
down
in
a
school,
and
I
just
want
to
say
director.
I
know
that
this
is
not
the
intent,
but
I
also
know
that
often
liberties
and
and
or
they're,
not
always,
you
know
the
unintended
consequences
from
what's
intended
and
from
what
the
charter
school
authority
would
expect
and
condone
doesn't
mean
that
that's
always
what's
happening
on
the
ground.
M
But
the
other
question
was
then,
if
we
did
have
to
close
a
grade
level,
so
then
doesn't
that
raise
other
concerns
about
that
school
as
a
whole.
Systemically.
L
L
You
know
I'll
give
a
little
bit
of
context
that
might
help
you
to
understand
why
you
think
this
change
is
important.
Going
back
to
2015
when
300
330,
the
the
two
sections
we're
talking
about
here
kind
of
came
to
their
current
form.
At
that
point
in
time,
charter
schools,
you
know,
pinecrest
academy
with
five
campuses-
would
be
rated
as
one
elementary
school
one
middle
school,
one
high
school
right,
even
though
they
have
five
campuses.
They'd
only
receive
one
elementary
one
middle
and
one
high
school
rating,
so
forward
fast
forward
to
2017
2018.
L
We
are
absolutely
think.
Accountability
is
a
critical
part
of
our
role,
but
what
we
don't
want
to
do
is
close
a
one-star
school
and,
at
the
same
time,
have
to
close
a
four
or
five
star
school.
That's
probably
a
disservice
to
the
community,
or
vice
versa,
keep
a
one-star
school
open
because
it's
got
a
four
or
five
star
school
connected
to
it
again
an
equal
potential
disservice,
and
so
we
don't.
L
L
There
very
likely
is
a
systemic
issue,
but
our
intent
is
not
to
try
to
get
around
the
accountability
responsibility,
but
to
make
sure
that
the
statutes
line
up
with
how
the
star
ratings
and
the
system
that
we're
based
on
is
constructed
so
again
happy
to
answer
any
follow-up
questions
there
as
well.
A
You
thank
you
and-
and
I'm
just
gonna
take
a
moment
to
say
that
we
will
continue
to
talk
offline.
There
might
be
an
opportunity
here
for
an
amendment
to
just
clarify
some
of
that
language,
so
the
intent
is
clear
as
we
move
on
to
sessions
that
perhaps
all
of
us
won't
be
around
for
and
we'll
remember
this
conversation.
So
I
think
that
would
be
a
good
thing.
Assemblywoman
tolls!
You
had
a.
H
Thank
you
chair.
I
mean
my
computer
was
having
a
hard
time
finding
the
mouse.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
that,
and
I
I
do
appreciate
all
the
discussion
and
some
of
those
clarifications
on
the
record
and
first,
let
me
just
say
how
much
I
appreciate.
I
know
this
body
pass
legislation
to
increase
accountability
and
transparency
last
session
and
in
spite
of
the
pandemic,
I
just
want
to
commend
your
work
on
still
holding
those
site
visits.
H
It
was
a
pretty
high
bar
to
meet
and
you
still
met
it
even
in
the
pandemic,
when
you
had
to
do
it
virtually.
So.
Thank
you
for
really
taking
on
that
task
of
doing
every
single
one
of
those
site
evaluations,
so
that
this
body
could
have
the
benefit
of
that
transparency.
H
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
heard
you
clearly
that
this
there
is
still
discretion
here.
This
is
not
automatic.
This
is
just
giving
you
the
discretion
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
not
making
it
a
requirement
that
it
has
to
be
mandated
that
it's
closed
and
and
that
you
could
also
revisit
that
the
next
year
as
well.
If
it's
still
one
star
school
is
that
correct.
L
Rebecca
fine
for
the
record,
so
there
are
two
existing
statutes
related
to
closure
and
termination.
One
that's
mandatory
one,
that's
permissive
and
both
right
now
speak
largely
to
the
the
contract
as
a
whole.
Although
there
is
some
level
grade
level,
language
included
in
the
permissive
one,
and
so
what
this
would
do
is
add
permissive
language
for
us
to,
instead
of
terminate
to
amend
that
contract,
to
eliminate
grade
levels
or
campuses.
So
you
know
end
result
this.
The
statutes
currently
say
close,
the
entire
everything
under
the
contract.
L
H
Yes,
that
that
does
help-
and
you
mentioned
one
school
in
particular-
maybe
two.
If
this
bill
had
been
in
place,
let's
say
passed
in
the
last
legislative
session:
how
many,
how
many
grades
do
you
feel
like
or
and
how
many
students
would?
This
have
had
an
impact
on.
L
Rebecca
fighting
for
the
record,
we
have
actually
seen
tremendous
improvement
in
this
performance
of
our
schools.
We
currently
only
have
two
schools
rated
as
one
star
and
again
we
have
a
lot
of
ratings,
so
we
have
about
100
star
ratings
across
all
of
our
schools,
and
so
we
don't
see
necessarily
a
significant
number
of
schools
that
would
have
been
impacted.
We
have
taken
some
accountability
actions
with
a
couple
of
schools
that
have
resulted
through
litigation
in
certain
segments,
elementary
middle
or
high.
Closing.
L
However,
you
know
we
don't
anticipate,
we
don't
see
that
we
have
had
a
a
strong
need
for
closure
that
has
not
been
met.
Rather
we
foresee
there
could
be
some
mismatch
down
the
road
between
the
now
star
rating
by
campus
and
level
versus
the
language
in
the
in
the
contract
or
in
the
statutes.
A
Thank
you
any
other
questions
from
committee
members.
A
Looking,
I
don't
see
any
hands
going
up.
Okay
with
that,
we
will
move
on
to
testimony
and
support
opposition
and
neutral
or
abc
68,
remember
to
clearly
state
and
spell
your
name
and
limit
your
testimony.
As
close
as
you
can
to
two
minutes,
we
will
begin
with
testimony
in
support
of
av-68
staff
and
from
broadcast
production
services.
Please
add
the
first
caller.
I
I
D
I
e-r-I-c-a-v-a-l-d-r-I-z
with
the
vagus
chamber
the
chamber
is
in
support
of
ab68.
The
chamber
supports
diverse,
diverse
educational
opportunity
for
the
students,
such
as
charter
schools
in
nevada.
We
believe
this
bill
continually
supports
student
achievements
and
the
well-being
of
our
students.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
your
time.
We
urge
your
support
for
this
bill.
I
N
Good
afternoon,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
victor
solcito
s-a-l-c-I-d-o
and
I'm
here
with
the
charter
school
association
of
nevada,
we
represent
public
charter
schools
throughout
the
state,
both
district
sponsored
and
state
sponsored
to
the
charter
authority.
We
simply
wanted
to
express
our
support
for
ab68
as
written.
N
This
simply
will
make
it
easier
to
reflect
any
accountability
measures
to
that
reality
and
we
are
in
support
of
it.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
mr
sulzido.
Any
other
callers
in
support.
I
O
I
just
wanted
to
call
in
support
of
assembly
bill
68.
As
you
all
know,
we
have
a
number
of
charter
schools
under
the
purview
of
the
clark
county
school
district
and
we
appreciate
the
work
in
the
support
of
state
public
charter
school
authority
and
working
closely
with
our
charter
school
team
at
the
school
district.
O
To
help
us
ensure
that
we're
evaluating
our
charter
schools
correctly
and
also
allowing
us
some
flexibility
and
being
able
to
work
with
these
schools
to
make
sure
that
all
of
our
schools
are
promoting
student
achievement
and
doing
the
best
they
can.
So
we
are
in
support
of
ab68
and
want
to
specifically
thank
rebecca
feidman
and
ryan
herrick.
It
has
been
a
pleasure
to
work
with
them
over
the
last
two
years
in
their
role
at
the
state
public
charter
school
authority,
and
we
look
forward
to
doing
so
in
the
future.
Thanks.
A
I
J
A
Thank
you
very
much,
mr
cohn.
Any
other
callers
in
opposition.
I
J
Good
afternoon
chris
bailey
d-a-l-y
nevada,
state
education
association,
the
voice
of
nevada
educators
for
over
120
years,
nfca
opposes
ab-68
which
moves
in
the
wrong
direction
to
enact
accountability,
measures
for
underperforming
charter
schools
during
last
session
nfc
push
for
greater
accountability
for
charters.
While
our
proposal
to
cap
expansion
was
not
successful,
the
legislature
did
pass
a
five-year
growth
management
plan
for
charters.
Interestingly
enough,
during
that
same
year,
this
group
of
this
growth
management
plan,
the
charter
school
authority,
approved
nearly
5
000
new
charter
slots
across
the
state.
J
While
there
have
been
some
improvements
to
charter
accountability
since
last
session,
including
actually
conducting
site
visits,
let's
be
honest
with
each
other.
The
charter
school
authority
is
only
now
clearing
a
relatively
low
bar
of
accountability,
while
it's
great
for
the
charter
authority
has
begun
to
address
baked
in
biases
against
disadvantaged
students
when
looking
at
overall
charter
school
populations,
charter
schools
serve
proportionally
fewer
at-risk
students,
english
learners
and
students
with
disabilities,
even
with
progress
on
more
diversity
and
new
charter
seats,
there's
no
path
for
charters
to
achieve
parity
in
the
foreseeable
future.
J
During
the
covet
19
pandemic,
we
saw
continued
unaccountability
as
many
charter
schools
gained.
The
system
by
triple
dipping
taking
state
funds,
cares,
act,
funds
and
ppp
funds
all
while
playing
by
their
own
set
of
rules.
Giving
these
these
concerns
nfca
opposes
8068,
as
we
believe
language
offered.
In
section,
4.6
lessens
accountability
for
underperforming
charters.
Under
current
statute,
the
sponsor
of
a
charter
school
shall
terminate
the
charter
contract
of
a
charter
school.
If
the
charter
school
receives
three
annual
ratings
establishes
the
lowest
rating
possible
in
a
five-year
period.
J
The
new
language
would
instead
allow
a
charter
school
to
continue
to
operate
by
only
serving
those
grade
levels
not
underperforming.
This
could
allow
a
charter
school
to
avoid
accountability
by
just
eliminating
a
single
or
handful
of
grade
levels.
This
seems
like
the
state
public
charter
school
authority
working
around
the
current
accountability
standards
for
underperforming
charter
schools,
so
they
don't
have
to
take
the
more
difficult
but
necessary
action
of
termination.
Thank
you.
I
A
I
D
A
L
Thank
you
chair.
No
just
we
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
everyone
today
and
to
receive
all
the
questions
and
we
look
forward
to
working
with
lcb
on
the
grade
level
issue
that
was
was
raised
here
today.
A
A
Now
we
will
move
on
to
public
comment
before
we
go
to
this
agenda
item.
I'd
like
to
remind
this
president
that
the
period
for
public
comment
is
an
opportunity
to
discuss
general
matters
that
fall
within
the
purview
of
the
committee
additionally
remember
to
clearly
state
and
spell
your
name
and
limit
your
time
as
close
to
two
minutes
as
possible.