This week the House took up a comprehensive education bill that began to tackle many of the tough issues facing our schools. As a member of the House K-12 Finance Division, I participated in months of committee hearings and public testimony regarding a new path for schools in Minnesota. We covered a wide variety of issues, including alternative teacher licensure, levy referendum extensions, and comprehensive funding changes, to name a few.

I did not support the final bill when it came to the floor, for a variety of reasons. To begin with, I think this clearly should have been two separate bills, with each traveling different paths. One portion could deal primarily with policy issues and the other with the school funding formula.

Some of the policy issues considered this year created a bit of controversy, especially alternative teacher licensure, such as the Teach for America program. This would have created a path for degreed professionals to become teachers if three conditions were met: A need for teachers exists in a subject area, the teaching staff does not reflect the racial and cultural diversity of the student population, and the district or charter school identifies a need to reduce the achievement gap. There was a good discussion about this proposal, but it did not garner enough votes to pass.

Another provision amounts to what I believe to be an unfunded mandates for schools. This proposal would have required school districts under 5,000 students to participate in efficiency task forces. They would be charged with making recommendations to the education commissioner on how to facilitate greater efficiency and reduce costs through collaboration across school districts and other government entities.

While I agree with the focus of these task forces, in southern Minnesota efforts such as this are already taking place, as I’m sure they are at other school districts across the state. This policy provision would not only create a mandate, it also moves our schools further away from local control. I believe is the wrong direction.

Perhaps the primary reason I voted against this bill is the component that addresses the school funding formula.

While I certainly appreciate all those who are working toward education formula reform, I don’t believe this package is ready for prime time. The entire structure of our school funding is a patchwork of regional priorities that have been sewn together over 30 years. Let’s get rid of the 28 funding categories, and instead identify what our real priorities are and fund these areas adequately. We need to step back and instead of tweaking formulas here or there, totally revamp how we pay for public education. I am currently working on a formula that would do just that.

Some people believe 30 years is long enough to wait for education funding reform. I say, if this only happens every 30 years or more, let’s get it right. We need to be bold and innovative, look for efficiencies, treat every school district fairly, and above all, pave a path for success for every student in Minnesota.

At the time I am writing this column, there are four days left in the 2010 legislative session. Our closing day, Monday, is a day for wrapping up loose ends and for final goodbyes from members who know they will not be here next year. Our last day to pass legislation is Sunday by midnight.

As of today, we do not have a final agreement with the governor on either the health care bill or the final budget bill. Negotiations are ongoing, and it appears some progress is being made. I am optimistic that although our final bills may not be entirely to my liking, this year the Governor will work with us and compromise, as we have.

As always, it is an honor to serve. Please contact me with your thoughts on what cuts we should make, and what areas should be protected. I can be reached at (651) 296-8216 or by e-mail at rep.robin.brown@house.mn. I look forward to hearing from you.

Robin Brown, DFL-Moscow Township, is the state representative for District 27A.