By Patrick B. McGuigan of www.CapitolBeatOk.com
Published: 15-Dec-2010
Writing for Neighbor Newspapers, including the Broken Arrow Ledger, Danielle Parker and Nour Habib report the Owasso Board of Education has scheduled a special meeting for Thursday (December 16) at 5 p.m.
According to a story update: “The agenda calls the board to discuss and vote on whether to rescind the board's resolution on House Bill 3393. The meeting will be held at the Dale C. Johnson Education Service Center, 1501 North Ash, in Owasso. There is no time slotted for public comment on the agenda posted."
In a previous story, they reported that Owasso attorney Gordon Cummings is seeking a Writ of Ouster for members of the local board of education who have defied implementation of House Bill 3393, the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships Program Act, also known as Lindsey’s Law.
In an October 26 letter to Attorney General Drew Edmondson, Cummings characterized as “willful misconduct” the decision to impede implementation of the law benefitting special needs children.
In that letter, Cummings said, “Removal from office and appointment of new board members is the best solution since it punishes lawbreakers, not innocent students.” Cumming continued, “They are setting themselves up as a mini-supreme court. When you feel a law is unconstitutional, you challenge it in court or go the legislature. But until the law is overturned, it should be followed."
Cummings argued, "The fair way to resolve this is between equal government forces in court, not the poor parents against a board with so many resources." According to the Ledger, Cummings said he has no financial interest in the case, but acted as a concerned citizen: "It has been nearly 60 days, and no one has done anything, because no one knows what to do. The law must be obeyed."
A writ can proceed from local petitioning or action by the attorney general, according to Cummings’ interpretation of a Supreme Court case from 1927. He said: “This is not a crime, but misconduct. No one wants to go to jail in this case, but by intentionally voting to disobey the law, they should be removed from their positions. An elected official has refused to do what his/her duty is, and that is, obey the law. It's pretty clear cut."
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Rep. Peters responds to negative comments by DHS commissioners about foster care law, child deaths
A front page story in the Sunday Oklahoman by Randy Ellis reports that the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Oklahoma Human Services Commission are blaming a new law for the recent deaths of two children that were not removed from their homes by DHS and the courts.
Rep. Ron Peters, R-Tulsa, is the Chair of the House Human Services Appropriation and Budget Committee and authored the new law. He issued the following statement today addressing the comments by the DHS commissioners:
After continuing to see Commissioners Wilkinson and DeVaughn blaming this child's death on HB 1734 I wonderif they have ever read the bill. They continually state that the law "requires officials to determine there is an imminent safety threat to the child before it can be removed."
Although it is difficult to fully assess the actions taken (or not) without fully reviewing the case file and investigation notes, the information provided by the OCCY report makes it difficult to understand why protective action, including removal of the children, was not taken much earlier in this family situation.
I do not believe that the problems in this case resulted from the Statute, but rather from the interpretation and decision-making regarding what constitutes a “safety threat” in a case involving drugs.
Under the Statute, "Investigation" means
In Oklahoma and around the country, a safety assessment tool is used for this purpose. The tool generally lists 12-15 factors that identify the presence of imminent danger. It is then up to the investigator to determine whether there is reason to believe that the factor exists and creates imminent danger. I have no idea on what basis, certainly not based on HB 1734, a person could say that evidence of drug abuse is not sufficient grounds to remove a child “without a DWI or a syringe in reach of a child to meet ‘imminent safety threat.’" This is obviously not in statue and it is difficult to believe it is in any of the internal standards that DHS may have developed. If so, the standards should be reconsidered.
For this family, clearly the substance use was the primary issue that impacted the safety of the children. There is general agreement in child protection agencies that, in families where substance use is occurring, there are two primary factors that must be taken into account when assessing for a safety threat or imminent danger.
 |
| Rep. Ron Peters |
After continuing to see Commissioners Wilkinson and DeVaughn blaming this child's death on HB 1734 I wonderif they have ever read the bill. They continually state that the law "requires officials to determine there is an imminent safety threat to the child before it can be removed."
Although it is difficult to fully assess the actions taken (or not) without fully reviewing the case file and investigation notes, the information provided by the OCCY report makes it difficult to understand why protective action, including removal of the children, was not taken much earlier in this family situation.
I do not believe that the problems in this case resulted from the Statute, but rather from the interpretation and decision-making regarding what constitutes a “safety threat” in a case involving drugs.
Under the Statute, "Investigation" means
a response to an allegation of abuse or neglect that involves a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the child, making it necessary to determine: (1) the current safety of a child and the risk of subsequent abuse or neglect, and (2) whether child abuse or neglect occurred and whether the family needs prevention- and intervention-related services.The changes to the Oklahoma Statutes do not actually define “imminent safety threat,” the term used by the Commissioners to describe what went wrong in this case. However, a similar term “safety threat” is defined as meaning:
the threat of serious harm due to child abuse or neglect occurring in the present or the very near future and without the intervention of another person, a child would likely or in all probability sustain severe or permanent disability or injury, illness or death;
Also, the definitions of child abuse and neglect referenced in this definition were not changed from previous law.Oklahoma Statutes require “a safety evaluation of a child’s situation by the Department using a structured, evidence-based tool to determine if the child is subject to a safety threat.”
In Oklahoma and around the country, a safety assessment tool is used for this purpose. The tool generally lists 12-15 factors that identify the presence of imminent danger. It is then up to the investigator to determine whether there is reason to believe that the factor exists and creates imminent danger. I have no idea on what basis, certainly not based on HB 1734, a person could say that evidence of drug abuse is not sufficient grounds to remove a child “without a DWI or a syringe in reach of a child to meet ‘imminent safety threat.’" This is obviously not in statue and it is difficult to believe it is in any of the internal standards that DHS may have developed. If so, the standards should be reconsidered.
For this family, clearly the substance use was the primary issue that impacted the safety of the children. There is general agreement in child protection agencies that, in families where substance use is occurring, there are two primary factors that must be taken into account when assessing for a safety threat or imminent danger.
- Is the use of the drug, including overuse of prescription drugs, impacting the parent’s ability to provide for the basic needs of the children – supervision, protection, and care? The extent of the negative usage and impact, the ages of the children, and other environmental factors are taken into consideration. OR
- Is the type of drug used considered so dangerous that imminent danger exists even when there is no clear information about the effects on the parent’s ability to provide for the children’s needs? Usually methamphetamine, crack, and heroin are identified as the drugs that automatically create imminent danger because of their highly addictive nature and the overwhelming evidence that parents are not able to function at an acceptable level when using these substances.
Rep. Nelson receives committee assignments
I previously served on the standing Human Services Committee.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Governor-elect Mary Fallin Statement on Health Care Bill Ruling
(OKLAHOMA CITY) - Governor-elect Mary Fallin released the following statement on a federal judge in Virginia’s ruling that a federal mandate for Americans to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional:
“Today’s ruling is an important step in rolling back the president’s job-killing health care bill. It’s good to see a federal judge understands what I – and most Oklahomans – have known from the start: President Obama’s health care plan is unconstitutional,” Fallin said.
“Oklahomans expressed their desire to opt out of the federal health care law when they overwhelmingly passed state question 756 in November. I will continue to work with Attorney General-elect Scott Pruitt as we explore our state’s legal options and find the best way to fight back against the federal health care bill.”
“Today’s ruling is an important step in rolling back the president’s job-killing health care bill. It’s good to see a federal judge understands what I – and most Oklahomans – have known from the start: President Obama’s health care plan is unconstitutional,” Fallin said.
“Oklahomans expressed their desire to opt out of the federal health care law when they overwhelmingly passed state question 756 in November. I will continue to work with Attorney General-elect Scott Pruitt as we explore our state’s legal options and find the best way to fight back against the federal health care bill.”
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
State Senate Names Committee Chairs
For Immediate Release: December 8, 2010
President Pro-Tem Designate Bingman Announces
Committee Chairs and Vice Chair Assignments
Senate President Pro Tempore Designate Brian Bingman, R-Sapulpa, announced additional Committee Chairman and Vice Chairman for standing committees and Chair and Vice Chairs of all Appropriations Subcommittees today.
“I am very proud to be able to call on such outstanding leaders today,” stated Bingman. “They bring exceptional talent and experience to the table and will no doubt help move Oklahoma forward to a better future.”
The State Senate’s committee Chairs and Vice Chairs for the 2011-12 session:
President Pro-Tem Designate Bingman Announces
Committee Chairs and Vice Chair Assignments
Senate President Pro Tempore Designate Brian Bingman, R-Sapulpa, announced additional Committee Chairman and Vice Chairman for standing committees and Chair and Vice Chairs of all Appropriations Subcommittees today.
“I am very proud to be able to call on such outstanding leaders today,” stated Bingman. “They bring exceptional talent and experience to the table and will no doubt help move Oklahoma forward to a better future.”
The State Senate’s committee Chairs and Vice Chairs for the 2011-12 session:
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Thanksgiving Day Proclamation by President George Washington
THANKSGIVING DAY 1789
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - A PROCLAMATION
Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor - and Whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness."
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - A PROCLAMATION
Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor - and Whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness."
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Sen. Anderson to Speak at National Summit on Education Reform
On December 1, Anderson will be in Washington D.C. to speak at a national conference about the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship, named for the infant daughter of Gov. Brad and First Lady Kim Henry who died from a rare neuromuscular disease.
“Oklahoma’s legislation will be highlighted as a way of ensuring all students, including those with special needs, have the best education possible,” Anderson said. “The fact that this legislation is in the national spotlight shows we’re on to something. The bottom line is ensuring special needs students can take advantage of programs that best suit their specific needs, whether they are in a public or private school setting.”
Other participants in the Foundation For Excellence In Education’s third annual National Summit on Education Reform include former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida; former Gov. Bob Wise of West Virginia; New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie; U.S. Department of Education Sec. Arne Duncan; and Sir Michael Barber, former education advisor to English Prime Minister Tony Blair.
“This is a very prestigious gathering of leaders in education, government and business who are dedicated to giving America’s children the very best educational opportunities possible,” Anderson said. “I’m honored to be able to share what we’re doing here in Oklahoma to achieve that goal and learn more about what other states are doing as well.”
Friday, November 19, 2010
Rep. Nelson named by Speaker-elect Steele to Working Group to Reform House Rules
Reform of conference committee process to increase transparency
OKLAHOMA CITY – House Speaker-elect Kris Steele today announced the creation of a working group to consider procedural reforms that will make the legislative process more transparent.
“While we have made tremendous strides towards increased transparency in recent years, I believe we can build on those successes and give citizens greater access to the legislative process,” said Steele, R-Shawnee. “I believe increased public scrutiny and oversight is vital to a healthy democracy, and technological advances now allow us to be more user-friendly than ever. I am serious about bold reform and am confident the members of the working group will develop proposals that significantly change the way things are done at the Oklahoma Capitol.”
Among other things, the working group will consider rule changes that open the conference committee process to allow actual meetings and public votes on conference committee reports. In addition, the group will consider reforms that could end the practice of voting on “shell” appropriation bills that contain no actual budget numbers.
The members of the working group are as follows:
State Rep. Jeff Hickman, R-Dacoma
State Rep. Gary Banz, R-Midwest City
State Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City
State Rep. David Dank, R-Oklahoma City
State Rep. Dan Sullivan, R-Tulsa
The committee will also consider putting in place a hard 24-hour rule that requires a House conference committee report to be filed and posted online for a full day before it can be considered on the House floor. Currently, there is no 24-hour rule during the final two days of session.
As part of that proposal, conference committee reports would also be posted online for member and public review with a link to previous versions of the bill available so changes can be more easily spotted.
“While we have made tremendous strides towards increased transparency in recent years, I believe we can build on those successes and give citizens greater access to the legislative process,” said Steele, R-Shawnee. “I believe increased public scrutiny and oversight is vital to a healthy democracy, and technological advances now allow us to be more user-friendly than ever. I am serious about bold reform and am confident the members of the working group will develop proposals that significantly change the way things are done at the Oklahoma Capitol.”
Among other things, the working group will consider rule changes that open the conference committee process to allow actual meetings and public votes on conference committee reports. In addition, the group will consider reforms that could end the practice of voting on “shell” appropriation bills that contain no actual budget numbers.
The members of the working group are as follows:
State Rep. Jeff Hickman, R-Dacoma
State Rep. Gary Banz, R-Midwest City
State Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City
State Rep. David Dank, R-Oklahoma City
State Rep. Dan Sullivan, R-Tulsa
The committee will also consider putting in place a hard 24-hour rule that requires a House conference committee report to be filed and posted online for a full day before it can be considered on the House floor. Currently, there is no 24-hour rule during the final two days of session.
As part of that proposal, conference committee reports would also be posted online for member and public review with a link to previous versions of the bill available so changes can be more easily spotted.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Speaker-elect Kris Steele announced top leadership appointments today
New poll: Oklahomans say 'Lindsey’s Law' should be enforced
Republished from www.CapitolBeatOk.com
School districts refusing to comply with Lindsey’s Law are flying in the face of widespread popular support for enforcement of the measure, according to a new public opinion survey from SoonerPoll.
A total of six public school districts have refused implementation of the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Children with Disabilities Program Act. The new SoonerPoll results indicate Oklahomans disagree, by a 2-1 margin, with the school boards’ defiance of the new law.
The controversial law firm of Rosenstein Fist Ringold has advised districts not to implement the law, even though the measure gained bipartisan legislative support and was vetted before enactment by Schools Superintendent Sandy Garrett and Governor Brad Henry.
Rosenstein Fist Ringold was previously involved in previous attempts to impede operation of Oklahoma’s charter school laws. After years of litigation in that matter, the firm and its clients lost, costing taxpayers several hundred thousand dollars in legal fees.
Last month, Superintendent Garrett told CapitolBeatOK that she believed members of the school boards in question had violated their oaths of office when they voted to impede implementation of the law.
The law written by state Rep. Jason Nelson of Oklahoma City and state Sen. Patrick Anderson of Enid -- with key co-sponsors including state Reps. Jabar Shumate and Anastasia Pittman -- was named in honor of Lindsey Nicole Henry, the daughter of the governor and his wife, Kim, who died in infancy of a rare disease.
Shumate’s support of the legislation provoked an all-out effort by labor unions, including the Oklahoma Education Association, to defeat the black Democrat from north Tulsa in the July primary. Shumate survived the political assault and was reelected.
Lindsey’s Law allows students with special needs (a wide range of disabilities) presently enrolled in public schools to access scholarships if they enroll in a private school. Critics have questioned the measure’s constitutionality. The measure did not increase funding for special education, and operates within the framework of existing finances.
According to a release from SoonerPoll, “When asked whether school districts should comply with the law until a constitutional ruling is made, 61.4 percent believe that they should compared to 29.5 percent who believe that school districts are not obligated to comply until a constitutional ruling is made.”
In all, the boards of education in five public school districts -- Owasso, Jenks, Union, Bixby and Broken Arrow – have chosen to defy the law. A sixth district, the Tulsa public school system, voted to process a few early applications but has turned away all other families seeking to access the program.
The defiance of the law has drawn critical response from parents of special needs children and from the bipartisan group of lawmakers who shepherded the law through the Legislature, including income Speaker of the House Kris Steele.
On Monday, an Owasso parent told a Tulsa television station, “Now we need to think about suing the school board to make them do what’s right. Because they’re choosing to violate the law they don’t agree with. It makes no sense.”
When the legislation cleared the Legislature last spring, SoonerPoll found 54.7 backed the measured. Today’s SoonerPoll analysis said the new results means “one of two things; support for the legislation has grown since its passage or many opposed to the bill believe it should be complied with regardless of their opinions.”
In a statement sent to CapitolBeatOK, Bill Shapard, CEO of SoonerPoll, said: "It is interesting to note that when the results are cross-tabulated by party and political label no major statistical differences are seen between Republicans and Democrats or liberals and conservatives. It is remarkable to see such a controversial issue split so evenly among political groups and ideologies."
Doug Mann, the lawyer for both the Broken Arrow and Jenks public school systems, has guided the school boards’ defiance of the new law.
The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs commissioned the new survey from SoonerPoll.com, which conducted its “scientific study using live interviewers by telephone of 518 likely voters from Nov. 5 – 11. The study has a margin of error of ± 4.3 percent.”
NOTE: Patrick B. McGuigan is editor of CapitolBeatOK. Stacy Martin is editor of The City Sentinel, a weekly newspaper where McGuigan is senior editor.
School districts refusing to comply with Lindsey’s Law are flying in the face of widespread popular support for enforcement of the measure, according to a new public opinion survey from SoonerPoll.
A total of six public school districts have refused implementation of the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Children with Disabilities Program Act. The new SoonerPoll results indicate Oklahomans disagree, by a 2-1 margin, with the school boards’ defiance of the new law.
The controversial law firm of Rosenstein Fist Ringold has advised districts not to implement the law, even though the measure gained bipartisan legislative support and was vetted before enactment by Schools Superintendent Sandy Garrett and Governor Brad Henry.
Rosenstein Fist Ringold was previously involved in previous attempts to impede operation of Oklahoma’s charter school laws. After years of litigation in that matter, the firm and its clients lost, costing taxpayers several hundred thousand dollars in legal fees.
Last month, Superintendent Garrett told CapitolBeatOK that she believed members of the school boards in question had violated their oaths of office when they voted to impede implementation of the law.
Shumate’s support of the legislation provoked an all-out effort by labor unions, including the Oklahoma Education Association, to defeat the black Democrat from north Tulsa in the July primary. Shumate survived the political assault and was reelected.
Lindsey’s Law allows students with special needs (a wide range of disabilities) presently enrolled in public schools to access scholarships if they enroll in a private school. Critics have questioned the measure’s constitutionality. The measure did not increase funding for special education, and operates within the framework of existing finances.
According to a release from SoonerPoll, “When asked whether school districts should comply with the law until a constitutional ruling is made, 61.4 percent believe that they should compared to 29.5 percent who believe that school districts are not obligated to comply until a constitutional ruling is made.”
In all, the boards of education in five public school districts -- Owasso, Jenks, Union, Bixby and Broken Arrow – have chosen to defy the law. A sixth district, the Tulsa public school system, voted to process a few early applications but has turned away all other families seeking to access the program.
The defiance of the law has drawn critical response from parents of special needs children and from the bipartisan group of lawmakers who shepherded the law through the Legislature, including income Speaker of the House Kris Steele.
On Monday, an Owasso parent told a Tulsa television station, “Now we need to think about suing the school board to make them do what’s right. Because they’re choosing to violate the law they don’t agree with. It makes no sense.”
When the legislation cleared the Legislature last spring, SoonerPoll found 54.7 backed the measured. Today’s SoonerPoll analysis said the new results means “one of two things; support for the legislation has grown since its passage or many opposed to the bill believe it should be complied with regardless of their opinions.”
In a statement sent to CapitolBeatOK, Bill Shapard, CEO of SoonerPoll, said: "It is interesting to note that when the results are cross-tabulated by party and political label no major statistical differences are seen between Republicans and Democrats or liberals and conservatives. It is remarkable to see such a controversial issue split so evenly among political groups and ideologies."
Doug Mann, the lawyer for both the Broken Arrow and Jenks public school systems, has guided the school boards’ defiance of the new law.
The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs commissioned the new survey from SoonerPoll.com, which conducted its “scientific study using live interviewers by telephone of 518 likely voters from Nov. 5 – 11. The study has a margin of error of ± 4.3 percent.”
NOTE: Patrick B. McGuigan is editor of CapitolBeatOK. Stacy Martin is editor of The City Sentinel, a weekly newspaper where McGuigan is senior editor.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Family speaks-out about Owasso Public School's failure to follow the law
Click headline to watch video
House Bill 3393 is a measure I authored with Senator Patrick Anderson during the 2010 legislative session. The bill was signed into law by Governor Henry in June. The new law provides publicly funded scholarships for special education students to attend a private school of their choice that meets their unique education needs.
Currently six Tulsa area school districts are openly defying this new law and denying the scholarships to eligible students. The districts failing to follow the law are Tulsa, Jenks, Broken Arrow, Union, Bixby and Owasso.
Governor-elect Mary Fallin Names Jim Reese Secretary of Agriculture
OKLAHOMA CITY – Oklahoma Governor-elect Mary Fallin today announced that former State Executive Director for the Oklahoma Farm Service Agency Jim Reese will serve as secretary of agriculture in Fallin’s administration and cabinet.
Governor-Elect Mary Fallin Launches Transition Website
Governor-Elect Mary Fallin has launch her transition website and is seek input from citizens.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
House GOP Majority Caucus Elects Leadership
House GOP Majority Caucus Elects Leadership
Speaker-elect Steele, Speaker Pro Temp Hickman & Caucus Chair Watson Chosen
OKLAHOMA CITY – Following on the heels of elections that gave Republicans a historic 70-31 margin of control in the Oklahoma House of Representatives, the House GOP caucus today chose its leadership and re-affirmed state Rep. Kris Steele as their choice for House Speaker-elect.
“I am honored and humbled by the support of my colleagues,” said Steele, R-Shawnee. “As we face the significant challenges of the coming session, I am committed to a process that utilizes the talents of all 101 members of this chamber to develop and advance pro-growth, conservative policies that will move Oklahoma forward.”
The GOP caucus elected its three top leadership positions today. In addition to Speaker of the House-elect, Republican lawmakers also selected House Speaker Pro Tempore-elect and Majority Caucus Chair.
In addition to electing Steele, the GOP caucus chose state Rep. Jeff Hickman, R-Dacoma, as Speaker Pro Tempore-elect and state Rep. Weldon Watson, R-Tulsa, as Caucus Chairman.
Over the next several weeks Steele plans to announce additional appointed GOP leadership positions.
On Tuesday, November 16 at 1:30 p.m., the newly-elected members of the entire House will be sworn in at the Capitol. In early January, the full House will convene for an organizational day to formally elect House leadership.
Speaker-elect Steele, Speaker Pro Temp Hickman & Caucus Chair Watson Chosen
 |
| Speaker Kris Steele |
“I am honored and humbled by the support of my colleagues,” said Steele, R-Shawnee. “As we face the significant challenges of the coming session, I am committed to a process that utilizes the talents of all 101 members of this chamber to develop and advance pro-growth, conservative policies that will move Oklahoma forward.”
The GOP caucus elected its three top leadership positions today. In addition to Speaker of the House-elect, Republican lawmakers also selected House Speaker Pro Tempore-elect and Majority Caucus Chair.
 |
| Rep. Jeff Hickman |
Over the next several weeks Steele plans to announce additional appointed GOP leadership positions.
On Tuesday, November 16 at 1:30 p.m., the newly-elected members of the entire House will be sworn in at the Capitol. In early January, the full House will convene for an organizational day to formally elect House leadership.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Picking-up yard signs
I'm out in the district picking-up my campaign yard signs after the election yesterday. When you're placing them during the camapign it never seems like you have enough signs out. You have a different attitude when it is time to pick them up. Where did all these signs come from?
Jason Nelson Re-election Vote Totals
5,147 votes 54.1%. Nelson
4,367 votes 45.9%. Orwig
Support and volunteer help made the difference - especially in the major surge of activity during the last week.
Will post more tomorrow after some sleep.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Polls open for next two hours
If you live in House District 87 please cast your vote for Jason Nelson. This will be one of the closest legislative races in the state.
Friends of Jason Nelson watch party tonight
Monday, November 1, 2010
Campaign watch party planned, Election results will be posted here
Our campaign watch party is schedule from 7 to 8:30 pm tomorrow, Tuesday, November 2nd in Suite 1508 at the Marriott at NW Expressway and Independence.
Friends and supporters are welcome to attend.
If you are unable to make the watch party you can keep-up with the returns here. We will be posting our election results here as they are called in by volunteers beginning at 7 pm. We will have the results for our race posted here much quicker than anywhere else. Hopefully we will have the final results by 7:45 pm.
Friends and supporters are welcome to attend.
If you are unable to make the watch party you can keep-up with the returns here. We will be posting our election results here as they are called in by volunteers beginning at 7 pm. We will have the results for our race posted here much quicker than anywhere else. Hopefully we will have the final results by 7:45 pm.
Halloween surprise: Late tactics target pro-lifers
By Patrick B. McGuigan at CapitolBeatOk.com
Strongly pro-life legislators, including two with “perfect” answers on the Oklahomans for Life survey of candidates for positions in the state Legislature, have been targeted with late mailers, radio spots and/or television advertisements. The communications which hit Friday and Saturday of last week, were designed to mislead voters about their records on pro-life issues.
One of the state’s leading advocates of pro-life protections, Oklahoma Family Policy Council Executive Director Mike Jestes, issued a statement saying attempts to use his critical analysis of one bill last legislative session were unwelcome and inaccurate.
In statement sent to CapitolBeatOK, Jestes said:
“Oklahoma Family Policy Council regrets the way in which our previous comments, which were internally directed at members of the Oklahoma Legislature, are now being used in partisan, political ways to scare concerned Oklahoma voters about the pro-life values of some very fine conservative, pro-life Oklahoma legislators.
“Unfortunately, many fine state legislators, including Rep. Ann Coody, Rep. Steve Martin, Rep. Jason Nelson, and possibly others, are being incorrectly characterized for partisan purposes as not pro-life.
“Their votes in 2010 over Senate Bill 1902 were about the regulation and control of Oklahoma's equine and animal husbandry industry. There were not then — nor are there now — any documented problems in Oklahoma about veterinary drugs being used for back-alley abortions or date rape.
“The bill in question, S.B. 1902, was later, at our suggestion, amended in the Senate to correct any possible deficiencies and is now consistent with federal law.”
Jestes concluded: “Voters in these affected districts should exercise their common-sense about politics in the last few days before an important election. Check out the records of these legislators directly, or via well-known pro-life organizations like Oklahomans for Life. Don't rely on charges by unknown political action committees. Don't be fooled.”
Rep. Nelson, the incumbent in west Oklahoma City’s District 87, garnered a perfect “pro-life” rating on the 12-question survey of Oklahomans for Life (LINK), as did Ann Coody of Lawton (District 64).
Nelson’s opponent, Dana Orwig, did not answer the pro-life questionnaire; nor did Coody’s foe, Michael J. Corrales. Both Orwig and Corarales are Democrats.
Steve Martin, the Republican incumbent in District 10 (Nowata, Osage and Washington counties), answered 11 of 12 questions in agreement with the Oklahomans for Life survey. His Democratic opponent, Nick Brown, agreed with Oklahomans for Life on ten questions, disagreed on one and did not answer another.
A key critic of S.B. 1902 who asked not to be identified told CapitolBeatOK on Saturday “it was the Dem [Democratic] House Political Action Committee who paid for the brochures.” Veterinarians involved in the fight over S.B. 1902 have also told CapitolBeatOK the mailer is distorted and inaccurate.
In interviews with CapitolBeatOK, Jestes made clear his earlier concerns about legislation relating to misuse of prescription medicines relating to veterinary medicine had been addressed in a series of Senate amendments.
One of the state’s leading advocates of pro-life protections, Oklahoma Family Policy Council Executive Director Mike Jestes, issued a statement saying attempts to use his critical analysis of one bill last legislative session were unwelcome and inaccurate.
In statement sent to CapitolBeatOK, Jestes said:
“Oklahoma Family Policy Council regrets the way in which our previous comments, which were internally directed at members of the Oklahoma Legislature, are now being used in partisan, political ways to scare concerned Oklahoma voters about the pro-life values of some very fine conservative, pro-life Oklahoma legislators.
“Unfortunately, many fine state legislators, including Rep. Ann Coody, Rep. Steve Martin, Rep. Jason Nelson, and possibly others, are being incorrectly characterized for partisan purposes as not pro-life.
“Their votes in 2010 over Senate Bill 1902 were about the regulation and control of Oklahoma's equine and animal husbandry industry. There were not then — nor are there now — any documented problems in Oklahoma about veterinary drugs being used for back-alley abortions or date rape.
“The bill in question, S.B. 1902, was later, at our suggestion, amended in the Senate to correct any possible deficiencies and is now consistent with federal law.”
Jestes concluded: “Voters in these affected districts should exercise their common-sense about politics in the last few days before an important election. Check out the records of these legislators directly, or via well-known pro-life organizations like Oklahomans for Life. Don't rely on charges by unknown political action committees. Don't be fooled.”
Rep. Nelson, the incumbent in west Oklahoma City’s District 87, garnered a perfect “pro-life” rating on the 12-question survey of Oklahomans for Life (LINK), as did Ann Coody of Lawton (District 64).
Nelson’s opponent, Dana Orwig, did not answer the pro-life questionnaire; nor did Coody’s foe, Michael J. Corrales. Both Orwig and Corarales are Democrats.
Steve Martin, the Republican incumbent in District 10 (Nowata, Osage and Washington counties), answered 11 of 12 questions in agreement with the Oklahomans for Life survey. His Democratic opponent, Nick Brown, agreed with Oklahomans for Life on ten questions, disagreed on one and did not answer another.
A key critic of S.B. 1902 who asked not to be identified told CapitolBeatOK on Saturday “it was the Dem [Democratic] House Political Action Committee who paid for the brochures.” Veterinarians involved in the fight over S.B. 1902 have also told CapitolBeatOK the mailer is distorted and inaccurate.
In interviews with CapitolBeatOK, Jestes made clear his earlier concerns about legislation relating to misuse of prescription medicines relating to veterinary medicine had been addressed in a series of Senate amendments.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Family Policy Council Answers Bogus Charge From My Opponents
For Immediate Release: Oct. 29, 2010
Contact: Mike Jestes (405) 787-7744, cell (405) 990-5888
Oklahoma Family Policy Council Executive Director Mike Jestes today released this statement about political campaign literature, radio spots, and television ads being released in a few selected markets across Oklahoma:
“Oklahoma Family Policy Council regrets the way in which our previous comments, which were internally directed at members of the Oklahoma Legislature, are now being used in partisan, political ways to scare concerned Oklahoma voters about the pro-life values of some very fine conservative, pro-life Oklahoma legislators. Unfortunately, many fine state legislators, including Rep. Ann Coody, Rep. Steve Martin, Rep. Jason Nelson, and possibly others, are today being incorrectly characterized for partisan purposes as not pro-life. Their votes in 2010 over SB 1902 were about the regulation and control of Oklahoma's equine and animal husbandry industry. There were not then — nor are there now — any documented problems in Oklahoma about veterinary drugs being used for back-alley abortions or date rape. The bill in question, SB 1902, was later, at our suggestion, amended in the Senate to correct any possible deficiencies and is now consistent with federal law. Voters in these affected districts should exercise their common-sense about politics in the last few days before an important election. Check out the records of these legislators directly, or via well-known pro-life organizations like Oklahomans for Life. Don't rely on charges by unknown political action committees. Don't be fooled.”
--30--
Contact: Mike Jestes (405) 787-7744, cell (405) 990-5888
Oklahoma Family Policy Council Executive Director Mike Jestes today released this statement about political campaign literature, radio spots, and television ads being released in a few selected markets across Oklahoma:
“Oklahoma Family Policy Council regrets the way in which our previous comments, which were internally directed at members of the Oklahoma Legislature, are now being used in partisan, political ways to scare concerned Oklahoma voters about the pro-life values of some very fine conservative, pro-life Oklahoma legislators. Unfortunately, many fine state legislators, including Rep. Ann Coody, Rep. Steve Martin, Rep. Jason Nelson, and possibly others, are today being incorrectly characterized for partisan purposes as not pro-life. Their votes in 2010 over SB 1902 were about the regulation and control of Oklahoma's equine and animal husbandry industry. There were not then — nor are there now — any documented problems in Oklahoma about veterinary drugs being used for back-alley abortions or date rape. The bill in question, SB 1902, was later, at our suggestion, amended in the Senate to correct any possible deficiencies and is now consistent with federal law. Voters in these affected districts should exercise their common-sense about politics in the last few days before an important election. Check out the records of these legislators directly, or via well-known pro-life organizations like Oklahomans for Life. Don't rely on charges by unknown political action committees. Don't be fooled.”
--30--
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Schools Hurting for Money, Some Refuse to Implement HB 3393
According to the Oklahoma State Department of Education the students currently on the new scholarship receive amounts ranging from $4,100 to $10,800 each year depending on their particular disability. If two dozen students received and average scholarship amount of $7,500 the total cost for the twelve students would be $180,000.
I think the state benefits more in the long run, dollar-for-dollar, from spending on the the scholarships than on quarter-of-a-million dollar superintendent salaries.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Media Advisory: State Board of Ed to Consider Special Needs Scholarship Issue
Parents, Advocates Seek Action Against Schools Breaking OK Law
WHO: State Rep. Jason Nelson (R-Oklahoma City), advocates for children with special needs, and parents of children with special needs
WHAT: State Board of Education Meeting
WHERE: State Board Room, Suite 1-20, Hodge Education Building at the Capitol complex, 2500 North Lincoln Blvd.
WHEN: 9:30 a.m., Thursday, October 21
THE STORY AT A GLANCE: During Thursday’s meeting, the State Board of Education is scheduled to consider possible action against schools that are violating state law governing the treatment of Oklahoma children with special needs.
State Rep. Jason Nelson, who authored the law providing scholarships to children with special needs (such as autism), will be in attendance, as will at least one affected parent of a special needs child. Other parents and advocates may also attend.
Under the scholarship program created through House Bill 3393, children with disabilities who have an individualized education program (IEP) qualify for a scholarship to attend any private school that meets the accreditation requirements of the State Board of Education. The amount of the scholarship is the amount the state would have spent on the child, so it requires no new spending.
Officials at the Bixby, Broken Arrow, Jenks, Owasso, Union and Tulsa school districts have voted to break that law, leaving special-needs children without access to appropriate educational services.
Nelson and affected families will be available to comment on the issue.
-30-
WHO: State Rep. Jason Nelson (R-Oklahoma City), advocates for children with special needs, and parents of children with special needs
WHAT: State Board of Education Meeting
WHERE: State Board Room, Suite 1-20, Hodge Education Building at the Capitol complex, 2500 North Lincoln Blvd.
WHEN: 9:30 a.m., Thursday, October 21
State Rep. Jason Nelson, who authored the law providing scholarships to children with special needs (such as autism), will be in attendance, as will at least one affected parent of a special needs child. Other parents and advocates may also attend.
Under the scholarship program created through House Bill 3393, children with disabilities who have an individualized education program (IEP) qualify for a scholarship to attend any private school that meets the accreditation requirements of the State Board of Education. The amount of the scholarship is the amount the state would have spent on the child, so it requires no new spending.
Officials at the Bixby, Broken Arrow, Jenks, Owasso, Union and Tulsa school districts have voted to break that law, leaving special-needs children without access to appropriate educational services.
Nelson and affected families will be available to comment on the issue.
-30-
State Board of Education is scheduled to discuss Tulsa area school boards' misbehavior
Monday, October 18, 2010
Update: Will HB 3393 Cost School Districts Money?
In an earlier post I answered this question. Here I'm providing more detail.
The school districts that have recently voted to ignore House Bill 3393 have claimed that when a student transfers to a private school on the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship Program it will result in reduced funding for the public school program that that student is leaving. Under provision in HB 3393 a portion of the funding that had been going to the school district will follow the student to the private school of the parent’s choice in the form of a scholarship. Their contention is that the district will be stuck without the revenue to cover the fixed costs for services that they were providing to the student before they transferred out on a scholarship.
The BALedger.com reported that Doug Mann, the school board attorney for Broken Arrow, said about HB 3393, “The fact of the matter is that the program that that child was in still has to be funded but it now has less funding for that program.”
What they have failed to mention is that there has been a provision in law for years that helps districts address the fixed costs that remain for a period of time after a student leaves.
Section 18-200.1 of Title 70 (1) is the "State Aid" formula section of law. It sets out how the school funding formula is calculated. As stated in subsection A the formula is calculated using the "highest weighted average daily membership for the school district of the two (2) preceding school years". The intent of this provision was to lessen the impact for those school districts that have fluctuating or declining enrollment.
The fact is that these school districts are able to continue to count for funding purposes a student that has transferred out of the district for two years after the transfer. This provides enough time for districts to adjust their fixed costs in order to protect their programs.
(1) §70-18-200.1. A. "Beginning with the 1997-98 school year, and each school year thereafter, each school district shall have its initial allocation of State Aid calculated based on the state dedicated revenues actually collected during the preceding fiscal year, the adjusted assessed valuation of the preceding year and the highest weighted average daily membership for the school district of the two (2) preceding school years."
The BALedger.com reported that Doug Mann, the school board attorney for Broken Arrow, said about HB 3393, “The fact of the matter is that the program that that child was in still has to be funded but it now has less funding for that program.”
What they have failed to mention is that there has been a provision in law for years that helps districts address the fixed costs that remain for a period of time after a student leaves.
Section 18-200.1 of Title 70 (1) is the "State Aid" formula section of law. It sets out how the school funding formula is calculated. As stated in subsection A the formula is calculated using the "highest weighted average daily membership for the school district of the two (2) preceding school years". The intent of this provision was to lessen the impact for those school districts that have fluctuating or declining enrollment.
The fact is that these school districts are able to continue to count for funding purposes a student that has transferred out of the district for two years after the transfer. This provides enough time for districts to adjust their fixed costs in order to protect their programs.
(1) §70-18-200.1. A. "Beginning with the 1997-98 school year, and each school year thereafter, each school district shall have its initial allocation of State Aid calculated based on the state dedicated revenues actually collected during the preceding fiscal year, the adjusted assessed valuation of the preceding year and the highest weighted average daily membership for the school district of the two (2) preceding school years."
Is it true that rogue districts' only choice was ignoring state law?
Dr. Cathy Burden, Superintendent for Union Public Schools, is quoted in a Fox 23 news story, "We do not have any status to be able to bring a lawsuit ourselves. We would if we could have done that. We would have challenged the law in some other way. But we do not have standing...it's against the law to sue the legislature, so we can't sue the State of Oklahoma. We have to therefore find a way to take this into the court system"
This is the excuse given by Tulsa area school districts for secretly waiting until parents had transfered their children to private schools before telling parents that the districts are going to ignore House Bill 3393 and leave the parents in an impossible situation. Parents must now pay the tuition and pay to sue the districts.
Is it true that districts did not have any choice but to force parents to sue. Is it true that the districts "do not have any status to be able to bring a lawsuit?"
The answer can be found in a Tulsa World story from December 29, 2007. The story begins, "Tulsa Public Schools filed suit against the state and the Oklahoma State Department of Education ... in an effort to get the Charter Schools Act declared unconstitutional. Filed in Oklahoma County District Court, the suit seeks declaratory judgment, as well as a permanent injunction to halt the payment of state funds to charter schools that otherwise would go to TPS."
Attorney Doug Mann was the attorney representing TPS in their lawsuit against charter schools. One would think he might remember this case and that the school district was able to seek declaritory judgement by a court.
Attorney Bill Wilkinson who practices education law took issue on NewsOn6.com with House Bill 3393, calling it "a stupid peice of legislation," and with the Tulsa area school boards' refusal to follow the law. NewsOn6 reports that Wilkinson believes that "the law is the law, and he's baffled that districts are choosing simply not to comply with it."
NewsOn6 goes on to quote Wilkinson's thoughts on the behaviour of these rogue school boards, "I've never seen anything like it before. I thought it was a bad dream when I saw it reported on the news. It's just a terrible, terrible mistake."
NewsOn6 writes that Wilkinson told them, "The districts could have filed what's called a 'Petition For Declaratory Judgement.' He says that would have allowed a district judge to rule on whether or not 3393 is constitutional."
I would like to know the real reason why Dr. Burden and the superintendents from Broken Arrow, Bixby, Owasso and Jenks chose not to seek declaritory judgement as the Tulsa school board did in 2007.
This is the excuse given by Tulsa area school districts for secretly waiting until parents had transfered their children to private schools before telling parents that the districts are going to ignore House Bill 3393 and leave the parents in an impossible situation. Parents must now pay the tuition and pay to sue the districts.
Is it true that districts did not have any choice but to force parents to sue. Is it true that the districts "do not have any status to be able to bring a lawsuit?"
The answer can be found in a Tulsa World story from December 29, 2007. The story begins, "Tulsa Public Schools filed suit against the state and the Oklahoma State Department of Education ... in an effort to get the Charter Schools Act declared unconstitutional. Filed in Oklahoma County District Court, the suit seeks declaratory judgment, as well as a permanent injunction to halt the payment of state funds to charter schools that otherwise would go to TPS."
Attorney Doug Mann was the attorney representing TPS in their lawsuit against charter schools. One would think he might remember this case and that the school district was able to seek declaritory judgement by a court.
Attorney Bill Wilkinson who practices education law took issue on NewsOn6.com with House Bill 3393, calling it "a stupid peice of legislation," and with the Tulsa area school boards' refusal to follow the law. NewsOn6 reports that Wilkinson believes that "the law is the law, and he's baffled that districts are choosing simply not to comply with it."
NewsOn6 goes on to quote Wilkinson's thoughts on the behaviour of these rogue school boards, "I've never seen anything like it before. I thought it was a bad dream when I saw it reported on the news. It's just a terrible, terrible mistake."
NewsOn6 writes that Wilkinson told them, "The districts could have filed what's called a 'Petition For Declaratory Judgement.' He says that would have allowed a district judge to rule on whether or not 3393 is constitutional."
I would like to know the real reason why Dr. Burden and the superintendents from Broken Arrow, Bixby, Owasso and Jenks chose not to seek declaritory judgement as the Tulsa school board did in 2007.
Will House Bill 3393 Hurt Public School Students?
The answer is NO if an April 2008 study of the Florida McKay Scholarship Program is any indication. Public school students who don't take advantage of the scholarships created by House Bill 3393 will also likely benefit.
A Manhattan Institute for Policy Research report evaluates the impact of the Florida McKay Scholarship Program for disabled students on the academic performance of the students who remain in the public school system. Oklahoma's Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program (HB 3393) is modeled on the McKay program. The McKay Scholarship is the oldest program of its type and the most studied.
The report summary states: "The report evaluates the impact of Florida’s McKay Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities ... on the achievement of disabled students who remain in their local public schools. Using data on public school students in Florida from 2000-01 through 2004-05, the authors found that reading and math test scores of students who were eligible for McKay vouchers but remained in the public schools improved substantially, even as private school alternatives became more available. The largest category of disabled students—those with Specific Learning Disability, a mild form of disability, accounting for 8.5 percent of all students in Florida—enjoyed the greatest gains. The academic proficiency of students diagnosed with more severe disabilities was neither helped nor harmed."
The report summary states: "The report evaluates the impact of Florida’s McKay Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities ... on the achievement of disabled students who remain in their local public schools. Using data on public school students in Florida from 2000-01 through 2004-05, the authors found that reading and math test scores of students who were eligible for McKay vouchers but remained in the public schools improved substantially, even as private school alternatives became more available. The largest category of disabled students—those with Specific Learning Disability, a mild form of disability, accounting for 8.5 percent of all students in Florida—enjoyed the greatest gains. The academic proficiency of students diagnosed with more severe disabilities was neither helped nor harmed."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
