Minutes10-18Mtg

Task Force on Magnet Schools
Meeting Minutes
October 18, 2005

Meeting called to order by Rep. Andrew Fleischmann, co-chair.

Task Force Members present: Dr. Betty Sternberg, Sen. Gaffey, Rep. Fleischmann, Kathy Demsey, Dr. Bruce Douglas, Dr. Cheryl Saloom, Cal Heminway, Robert Smalley, Tom Scarice, Rep. David Labriola, Kate O’Keefe (on behalf of Sen. Herlihy).

SDE Staff present: Mark Stapleton, Mark Linabury, Karen Flanagan, Bill Magnotta, Janice Dinnall, and Laura Anastasio.

I. Minutes of the September 20, 2005 meeting were approved.
II. State Department of Education Presentation:
A. Mark Stapleton presented information regarding the overall performance of magnet students on the CMTs and the CAPT in comparison to ERG H, ERG I, Charter School students, and statewide performance.

B. Mr. Stapleton presented information concerning the location of magnet schools and the levels of participation from the surrounding school districts.

- Overall, students in magnet schools on the average received significantly higher scores than students from ERG I schools, slightly lower scores than ERG H schools, and lower than the statewide average scores. Magnet and Charter school students were close to each other with respect to average scores.
- Maps showed that the majority of magnet schools were concentrated in the Hartford and New Haven areas.
- Other urban areas had few or no magnets. Task Force members noted a need to encourage other urban areas to develop magnet school programs.
- Maps showing the number of school districts that participate in the magnet program show that approximately 75% of school districts participate to some degree.

C. Bob Brewer presented information on magnet school construction.

- Financing of magnets: up until 2004, the state paid for 100% of the construction costs.
- Starting in 2005, the state provides 95% of the construction costs, and towns must allocate 5% of the construction costs.
- State aid for a regular public school building would range from 20% to 80% of the construction costs.
- There is no statutory limit on the cost per square foot for the magnet schools. Construction costs tend to run approximately 15 to 20% higher than regular public school buildings. For example, the cost of a seat in a regular public school may cost about $60,000, but the cost of a magnet seat may cost about $75,000. When the cost per square foot is too high, the SDE may ask for further information and provide this information to the General Assembly. However, the SDE does not have the legal authority to disapprove costs.
- Members noted that there may be a need for an amendment to give more authority to the SDE to keep costs down.

D. Mr. Brewer presented information on the financing of magnets.

E. Application process:

- It takes one to two years to develop a plan and about one year to complete the approval process.
- Applicants must show the impact on racial diversity. (The law requires that enrollment must be 75%/25%.)
- Existing schools must report annually the numbers of students in various racial/ethnic groups. The SDE monitors to ensure that the demographics comport to the school’s operation plan. Schools that do not maintain appropriate numbers are in danger of losing their grant.
- Given the geographical concentration of magnets and the high costs of building and operating such schools, members noted there may be a need to allow for greater state planning in the development of magnet schools: (1) to control the cost of construction and operation, and (2) to encourage more magnets in urban areas with little or no magnets.
- Members asked if there was an indication of continued interest in public school choice. Given the existing wait lists for magnets, there is a great demand for such programs. In addition, the number of students participating in the open choice program shows that parents are willing to have their child attend school despite the travel time.
- When do we cut off certain districts? With the purpose being racial/ethnic diversity, we need to see whether the goals of racial diversity have been achieved in those communities.

F. Magnet Transportation:

- The magnet school transportation grant is capped at $1200 per student.
- The home district (where the magnet is located) provides transportation for students residing within the district as it would for any other public school student.
- Other districts participating in the magnet program and RESCs may, but are not required to, provide transportation. Outlying districts’ transportation costs that exceed $1200 per student may be partially reimbursed by the state through the regular transportation grant. RESCs which provide transportation may also be reimbursed up to $1200 per student. Parents may be reimbursed at a rate of $3 per day. Less than half of the magnet students are provided transportation.
- The state pays approximately 80% of the transportation costs.
- Many outer suburbs that could help with the racial diversity of a magnet may not be able to participate due to the added transportation costs. Thus, families who may wish to participate do not have access to the magnets, and the goal of racial diversity is more difficult to achieve.
- Members noted that the Task Force should consider a proposal to change the funding for transportation to give districts an incentive to participate.

III. Announcements
A. Upcoming meetings will be November 1, 2005 and November 15, 2005 at 2:00 p.m. at the LOB.
B. Sen. Gaffey noted that the list of issues in the 9/20 minutes is not a final list. Any member who wishes to discuss a matter that is not listed may contact Mark Stapleton. Such issue needs to be directly related to magnet schools.
C. The issues to be discussed at the next meeting will be (1) tuition/operation costs for magnets, (2) access/waitlists for magnets, (3) racial diversity
IV. The meeting was adjourned.

The meeting called to order by Rep. Andrew Fleischmann, co-chair.

SDE Staff present: Mark Stapleton, Mark Linabury, Karen Flanagan, Bill Magnotta, Janice Dinnall, and Laura Anastasio.

I. Minutes of the September 20, 2005 meeting were approved.
II. Mark Stapleton presented information regarding the overall performance of magnet students on the CMTs and the CAPT in comparison to ERG H, ERG I, charter school students, and statewide performance.
III. Mr. Stapleton presented information concerning the location of magnet schools and the levels of participation from the surrounding school districts.
A. The majority of magnet schools are concentrated in the Hartford and New Haven areas. Other urban areas had few or no magnets.
B. Task Force members questioned whether there is a need to encourage other urban areas to develop magnet programs if a need is demonstrated.
IV. Bob Brewer presented information on magnet school construction.
A. Construction costs tend to run approximately 15 to 20% higher than regular public school buildings.
B. When the cost per square foot is too high, the SDE may ask for further information and provide this information to the General Assembly. However, the SDE does not have the legal authority to disapprove costs.
C. Given the geographical concentration of magnets and the high costs of building and operating such schools, members noted there may be a need to allow for greater state planning in the development of magnet schools: (1) to control the cost of construction and operation, and (2) to encourage more magnets in urban areas with few or no magnets.
V. Bob Brewer presented information on student transportation for magnets.
A. The magnet school transportation grant is capped at $1200 per student.
B. The home district (where the magnet is located) provides transportation for students residing within the district as it would for any other public school student. Other districts participating in the magnet program and RESCs may, but are not required to, provide transportation. If they do, they may be reimbursed up to $1200 per student. Outlying districts’ transportation costs that exceed $1200 per student may be partially reimbursed by the state through the regular transportation grant. Parents may be reimbursed at a rate of $3 per day.
C. Less than half of the magnet students are provided transportation.
D. The state pays approximately 80% of the transportation costs.
E. Many outer suburbs that could help with the racial diversity goals of a magnet school may not be able to participate due to the added transportation costs, and families who may wish to participate do not have access to the magnets.
F. Members noted that the Task Force should consider a proposal to change the funding for transportation to give districts an incentive to participate.
VI. Announcements:
A. Upcoming meetings will be November 1, 2005 and November 15, 2005 at 2:00 p.m. at the LOB.
B. Sen. Gaffey noted that the list of issues in the 9/20 minutes is not a final list. Any member who wishes to discuss a matter that is not listed may contact Mark Stapleton. Such issue needs to be directly related to magnet schools.
C. The issues to be discussed at the next meeting will be (1) tuition/operation costs for magnets, (2) access/waitlists for magnets, (3) continuation of financing issues.
VII. The meeting was adjourned.