CSBA presses for relief from federal regulations
Local schools’ interests, NCLB sanctions among topics at NSBA’s D.C. conference
Published: February 26, 2013
Armed with a healthy dose of righteous indignation and the facts to back it up, CSBA’s Executive Committee, association staff and governance team members from across the state traveled to Washington, D.C. in January to seek relief from federal education regulations and additional resources to make schools safer.
Talks with White House officials and representatives from the U.S. Department of Education highlighted a day of advocacy that came at the conclusion of the National School Boards Association’s Jan. 27-29 Federal Relations Network Conference, which also included dozens of meetings with California congressional representatives on Capitol Hill.
CSBA President Cindy Marks led a 19-person delegation of school district and county office of education board members from California, joining hundreds of colleagues from across the nation to hear the latest on how critical federal issues will impact local public schools and to advocate for schools’ interests.
“Meeting and working with other board members around some of the same issues provides a collective voice for our concerns,” Marks said afterward. “Whenever we as school board members have an opportunity to meet with our legislators or their staff, we should take advantage of that opportunity. Our message is much more powerful whenever we come together as a collective voice for the needs of our students.”
NCLB relief sought
In meetings at the White House and U.S. Department of Education headquarters, Marks, Assistant Executive Director for Governmental Relations Dennis Meyers and CSBA’s Executive Committee delivered a frank and unflinching message about the realities of school board governance in an era of excessive regulation and inadequate funding.
A key message from California board members: Secretary of Education Arne Duncan erred last December when he denied the state’s bid for a waiver that would free schools from some of the most unworkable aspects of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
“We talked about how disappointed we were about the denial of our waiver,” Meyers said. “We said that our waiver was honest and was realistic about what we could do. We highlighted the gains that California students have made over the past decade on very high state standards and then contrasted that at the federal level with being told none of that counted. We told federal education officials we thought the denial was counter to what the administration should be trying to accomplish with its education initiative.”
School safety, other issues
In the meeting with White House officials, the delegation also outlined the need for counseling and mental health services to be included in school safety programs. Marks stressed the need to restore counseling services to cash-strapped public schools. The group praised the president’s comprehensive approach to school safety but added that schools need more support to enact preventive programs and design emergency preparedness plans.
“CSBA is pleased that the President’s proposals on safety are comprehensive and recognize the issues of school climate and mental health as central to school safety,” CSBA Executive Director Vernon M. Billy wrote in a Jan.22 letter to Vice President Joe Biden. “Addressing these issues takes thought, effort and time; knee-jerk reactions won’t engender real solutions. CSBA appreciates the recognition in the proposed school safety initiatives that each school is different and needs flexibility to address the needs and priorities particular to it.”
Meyers said CSBA representatives also pointed out that requiring local educational agencies to compete for grants to finance proposed school safety services “means that only a few LEAs benefit from the money.”
“We urged the administration to look at getting the best bang for the buck by requiring recipients to distribute their programs to others,” Meyers explained. “It’s the same issue we have with other federal programs they’ve been starving, and steering money into
competitive grants instead.”
CSBA also prepared a series of succinct policy and issue briefs urging Congress and the administration to reach agreement on plans to avoid across-the-board cuts in federal funds for key education and social programs—also known as sequestration—and to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
In meetings with congressional representatives, CSBA members also discussed proposed legislation, co-sponsored by NSBA, that would curb what supporters call the excessive intrusion by the federal Department of Education into the affairs of local school district policy and governance.
Meyers said it was gratifying that CSBA’s message received such thoughtful consideration. But he said he has few illusions about lawmakers’ capacity to work together to achieve positive change.
“CSBA delivered its message to a dysfunctional Congress,” he said. “So while our message was received, this is a very difficult time in Congress’ history because there is no middle ground on anything. Schools are caught in the middle. But school board members cannot give up. The need to communicate has never been greater as we attempt to continue our cry that education is a bipartisan issue.”