OPPONENT TESTIMONY ON HB 191 BY
DAN LANGSHAW
NORTH ROYALTON SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER
BEFORE THE
EDUCATION COMMITTEE
OHIO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 25, 2012
Good Evening, Chairman Stebelton, Vice Chair Newbold, Ranking Member Luckie, and members of the House Education Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the proposed Substitute HB 191 on the Minimum School Year. My name is Dan Langshaw, and I am member of the North Royalton School Board.
The North Royalton City School District is located in southwest Cuyahoga County and encompasses both the city of North Royalton and parts of the neighboring city of Broadview Heights. Our public school district provides education K-12 to over 4,700 students in our community.
I would like to express concerns with the proposed Substitute HB 191. Specifically, we are opposed to the provision of the bill that requires a thirty-day legal notice and hearing in order to begin classes before Labor Day. Such a mandate would cause an unnecessary burden to local school districts throughout Ohio, including the North Royalton City School District.
Boards of education adopt school calendars in public session. Such public sessions include the opportunity for interested parties to offer public comments prior to any action by the Board of Education. To add the unnecessary burden of a thirty day notice seems to be an unneeded bureaucratic step to a process which has served our school district well in the past.
Please consider removing this provision of the bill and allow for us to retain our local control in deciding what is in the best interest of our community and students when creating our school calendar.
In closing, our community is happy with the current calendar we have and the collaborative process our district uses to create it. We do support the conversion of school days to hours in that this enhances local control and the ability of elected board of education members to respond to the needs of their students, parents, and residents. Please let the people decide what is best and not Columbus. Until this provision is removed, we remain oppose HB 191 in its current form.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.