In fact, according to our sources in Madison, legislatorswon’t take up the measure until well after the new year, if they act on it atall.
Here’s what we’re hearing: The Milwaukee TEACHAct, which would hand over MPS to the Milwaukee mayor and his or her appointedsuperintendenta bill authored primarily by Democrats Sen. Lena Taylor and Rep.Pedro Colon, with the support of the governor and Mayor Tom Barrettisn’tpopular with other Democrats. That includes Democrats in the city, who are outragedby what they see as a power grab, as well as outstate Democrats, who aren’tconfident that the bill will change MPS for the better.
Republicans, on the other hand, may want tosupport the bill, since it would stick it to Milwaukee, help to destroy public educationand pave the way for a statewide voucher system that pours money intoprivatemostly church-basedschools. Then again, the GOP may not want to hand avictory to Doyle and Barrett. But a mayor-controlled MPS favors deep-pocketedsuburban conservatives, who, as potential mayoral campaign donors suddenlyinterested in the city, could have more influence over the Milwaukee mayor andthe state’s largest school district than they have under the current system.
We also hear that lawmakers are concernedabout rushing to pass a bill that changes the governance of a $1.1 billionentity. It’s an enormous piece of public policy. Get it wrong now, and thosemistakes will be compounded by the amount of money at stake and the number ofkids and families affected.
It took about a year to craft the drunken driving measures tobe taken up by the Legislature in an extraordinary session. In contrast, theMilwaukee TEACH Act was introduced less than a month ago.
Our sources tell the Shepherd that the MPS debate won’t happen until the spring so itcan be done carefully and thoroughly. That doesn’t mesh with the governor’sapplication for federal “Race to the Top” money, which is due by Jan. 19, 2010.
In addition, the MPS board is going ahead withits search for a new superintendent, and aims to announce final candidates inearly 2010. But the mayor wants to appoint the next MPS superintendent; adelayed takeover bill won’t help him.
What’s more, the Legislature doesn’t have totake up the bill favored by the governor. According to the LegislativeReference Bureau, “the Legislature has considerable latitude to determine towhat extent and in what form it responds to the [governor’s] advisoryinstructions. It is even free to produce legislation at cross-purposes to thegovernor’s intentions, provided it stays within the subject area restrictions.”
That means the Legislature could take up theRACE for Success Act, authored by Rep. Tamara Grigsby and Sen. Spencer Coggs.That bill would preserve a strong elected MPS board, but allow the mayor moreinput on the district’s budget and policies. The governor and mayor don’t wantthis bill to pass, preferring to go for the full takeover with an elected butirrelevant school board.
