ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, May 2, 1996 TAG: 9605020038
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JON GLASS LANDMARK NEWS SERVICE
A politically charged debate in Virginia over whether to accept federal Goals 2000 education money may soon get even hotter - thanks to action by Congress last week as it finished work on the 1996 federal budget.
Besides appropriating $350 million in Goals 2000 funds, Congress amended a law to allow local school districts to apply directly to the federal government for the money.
The change, one of several made to address criticism of Goals 2000, escaped attention last week during the flurry of last-minute budget negotiations. As word spread this week, educators and the administration of Gov. George Allen began to sort out what it means.
In Virginia, the law's change could make it possible for local school districts to bypass Allen, who has refused to take the state's $6.7 million share of the Goals 2000 money.
But there is a catch: Before they could apply, school districts would have to get approval from the state Board of Education.
That could prove as difficult as getting permission from Allen. Seven members of the nine-member board are appointees of the Republican governor, and most seem to share his view that accepting the money could lead to unwanted federal intrusion into state and local education decisions. The money is designed to help states improve their schools.
Allen last month vetoed a bill passed by the General Assembly that would have required his administration to accept Goals 2000 money if 85 of the state's 134 school boards asked for it. The state Board of Education voted 7-2 urging Allen to veto the bill.
``If the question is, `Is it OK for local school officials to hand over state sovereignty to power-grabbing federal officials?' the answer is no,'' said board President Michelle Easton. ``We don't need those people sitting in Washington to tell us what good academic standards are. We've already developed them.''
If nothing else, however, Congress' action likely will set off another round of debate on Goals 2000, shifting the focus from Allen to the state board, which some observers say may be more responsive to the will of local school boards.
``I guess it depends on how much pressure is put on them,'' said David Blount, a spokesman for the Virginia School Boards Association.
Local interest in the money is high. As of Tuesday morning, 89 boards had passed resolutions calling on Allen to accept the money, Blount said. Local officials say the money could help equip schools with technology and train teachers.
``It may not sound like a lot of money, but it can support our teaching staff and elevate existing programs,'' said Ulysses Turner, chairman of the Norfolk school board.
Parent Frank Tetrick, who has two children at a Suffolk school, said: ``People want quality, people want improvement, and you don't get it without investing, and to do that you need money. I'm paying for this money to go to other places, so I'd just as soon some of it come home.''
Virginia and New Hampshire rejected first-year Goals 2000 money, which was "planning money," and the Montana legislature recently voted to refuse the money in the program's second year. Republican governors in Alabama and California have wavered on using second-year money.
Also last week, two Virginia congressmen, Jim Moran, D-Alexandria, and Rick Boucher, D-Abingdon, introduced an unrelated bill that was similar to the budget amendment except in one key respect: Their bill would allow localities to work directly with the federal government without approval by Allen or any state board or agency.
Officials, however, don't hold out much hope for Moran and Boucher's bill because of opposition in Congress that it would leave state officials out of the process.
Among other key changes to Goals 2000, authored by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., is one to allow states to get money without submitting an improvement plan for federal approval. Also, nothing in the law would require states to offer ``outcome-based'' education, which has been criticized for stressing heightened self-esteem over strong academics.
In addition, Congress eliminated a national education improvement panel, which opponents likened to a national school board that would attempt to dictate policy to states and local districts.
Ken Stroupe, a spokesman for Allen, said the changes ``certainly validates the concerns the governor has raised all along.''
Stroupe said the governor will review the changes, but suggested that the governor would continue to oppose the program in its present form. Allen has said he would accept the money only if it were offered to states as a ``no-strings'' block grant.
LENGTH: Medium: 86 linesby CNB