[Local-Maine-Schools] When 'No' doesn't really mean no. (Senate moves LD 1932 to the House (details))

[Brian Hubbell]

As you may recall, when we last left off with LD 1932, there was some
concern regarding the requirements for budget validation.

Precisely there were two separate concerns, although both were similarly
important to more than a few Republicans.

First was the requirement for validation by referendum of all the school
budgets presently under development this season.  These votes are required
under the current reorganization law even though school systems are not yet
reorganized.

Regarding this, legislators were generally either of the view that the
present state of school reorganization was already so chaotic that holding
districts and municipalities to a new interim budget approval process was an
unreasonable burden or else of the view, (apparently predominate among
Republicans, even those who opposed all other aspects of the consolidation
law) that giving local voters the last word over their school budgets was
the single necessary outcome, even if all the rest of the school
reorganization effort, for better or worse, went down the tubes.

The former view prevailed in the Education Committee and so Committee
Amendment 'A", the Majority
Report<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>,
postponed the budget validation requirement, while the Minority Report had
retained it.

This difference was noted by Minority Leader Senator Weston when the Senate
first took up LD 1932 on February 12.  Nevertheless, Committee Amendment 'A'
prevailed that day.

The second concern (raised initially by Senator Rosen and followed up in a
critique a few days later by Geoff Herman from MMA) was specific to the
Damon amendment and the lack of a specific provision to ensure that Regional
School Union budgets were also subject to voter referendum.  While this
latter was essentially a technical change with no one opposing it in
principle, it was also held to be important to effect, particularly among
Republicans as a matter of consistency.

So, given the closeness of the vote and odd alliances that originally
supported the Damon amendment, the Senate leadership had to weigh the risks
of opening it up again to amendment, which would have been one way to insert
some particular language about the validation of Union budgets.  The other
route, (presumably safer and the one leadership settled upon), was to amend
LD 1932 as a whole to include more specific language about validation.

This latter came forward as an amendment from Senator
Martin<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>.
 The amendment language itself was brief, but still generated its own round
of concerns and suspicions, as it specified several exceptions, which
required an interim adjournment for the D&R caucuses to satisfy themselves
that the amendment in fact did accomplish what it was advertised as doing.

It evidently did so.  Because, when the Senate reconvened, the Martin
amendment passed unanimously.

Then, to get after the other concern about the postponed overall requirement
for budget validation, Senator Gooley moved to suspend the Rules in order to
allow the Senate to reconsider their approval of the Majority report,
presumably to allow Senator Mills to remove the mechanism that delayed
budget referenda.  This rule suspension would have required a 2/3 majority
but received only simple majority -- with all the Rs, joined by Senator
Bryant, supporting and all the other D's in opposition.  So the postponement
of the validation requirement held.

Senator Raye then offered an
amendment<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>which
allows individual municipalities to withdraw from RSUs once they're
established -- a divorce provision, if you will, which provides an indirect
way out for member towns that otherwise may be unwillingly compelled into
RSUs by their existing regional associations with SADs or CSDs.

Then the Senate voted on the full version of LD 1932 as amended by the Majority
Report<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>,
the Damon amendment<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>,
the Martin amendment<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>,
and the Raye amendment<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027315&LD=1932&Type=4&SessionID=7>.
 This carried 20-13.

In reading that
roll-call<http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/rollcall.asp?ID=280027315&chamber=Senate&serialnumber=285>,
bear in mind that that last vote was tempered by several crosscurrents.  A
few Democrats who were initially opposed to the Damon amendment evidently
believed that a bill containing it was better than no bill at all.  And, at
the same time, a number of Republicans who voted 'no' did so knowing that
the Damon amendment was safe.

In voting 'no', these Rs held the overall vote under two-thirds which kept
1932 from being approved as an emergency measure.  This results in a later
enactment of the law which means that the postponement of the budget
validation requirement is itself postponed.  So this in itself achieves the
goal that the Republicans considered essential.

At least that's how I interpreted what went on there this morning.

Next, the whole package gets taken up in the House. Action on this could
conceivably happen as early as tomorrow morning, although Wednesday or
Thursday, at this point, seems more likely.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mainetalk.org/pipermail/local-maine-schools_mainetalk.org/attachments/20080225/b17f4e02/attachment.htm>