Pub. 6 2016-2017 Issue 2

24 Removing Regulatory Requirements BY SENATOR LINCOLN FILLMORE A lmost 20 years ago, the Utah legislature struck a bargain with education reformers. They wanted to see what was possible if they freed public schools of at least some of the regulatory burdens piling up on educators. Thus, they created charter schools, or Utah’s “laboratories of innovation.” Committed to innovation, charter schools offered an oppor- tunity to evaluate how much of Utah’s regulatory superstructure was necessary, and how much merely limited the creativity and initiative in classrooms, board rooms and staff rooms. As it turned out, eliminating those regulatory burdens did not hamper charter schools. To the contrary, the number, variety and success of Utah charter schools has multiplied in ever expanding ways. Unfortunately, Utah’s elected officials have not yet taken the next logical step, and relieved all public schools of those regula- tory requirements. Instead they have further clamped down on all of public education. Considered one at a time, imposing a new regulation here or another regulation there isn’t a significant burden, but the collective weight of all those regulations stifles the innovation public schools need. Having spent years navigating these shoals professionally, I am keenly aware of the burden these regulations impose. In many cases, well-intended regulations originating in different parts of the education bureaucracy require public schools to submit the same information in multiple reports. In other cases, regulations mandate one solution to a common problem, when circumstances and creativity could allow educators to solve the problem in multiple equally useful ways. I hope that charters can lead public education to new heights of creativity. Last summer, I began asking educators how the Legislature could free up public education. What reports does the Legislature require schools to submit which merely repeats information schools already submit? Which statutes mandate a particular solution to a problem, even though multiple solutions could work just as well? Even though those conversations were still beginning, last session I sponsored SB 240, Local School Options. I did not expect that the bill would not pass in its first year, but I wanted to move these conversations forward. If a school can demonstrate to the State Board of Education that they can resolve the underlying problem the statute or rule addresses, then the State Board of Education should have authority to grant the school a waiver from board rule or statute. As expected, the Legislature did not pass SB 240, but I remain committed to freeing up the creativity of Utah educators to address the needs of their students. So I am asking Utah charter schools and the rest of the public education community to talk with each other and with me about how to trim the regulatory burden schools face. UAPCS is pleased to work with Senator Fillmore and the rest of our public education colleagues on this important project. All of public education can and will benefit as we relieve educators from unnecessary regulations. Please join us and him in these conversations.