ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, May 24, 1996 TAG: 9605240073
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-5 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: RICHMOND
SOURCE: Landmark News Service
The State Board of Education cracked open the door Thursday to accepting controversial ``Goals 2000'' funding - as long as the federal government allows Virginia to spend all the money on computers and exempts the state from all regulations governing the program.
The board voted, 6-2, to ask the U.S. Department of Education whether it would agree to free Virginia of ``federal mandates, restrictions or intrusion of any kind'' if the state pledged to use the money for technology.
The panel expects to discuss the government's answers and reconsider the matter at its meeting in June.
The state board has sided with Gov. George Allen in refusing to take Goals 2000 money - which would amount to $6.7 million this year - for fear of federal interference in the state's education policies.
But board members returned to the issue Thursday in light of recent changes in U.S. law designed to prevent federal meddling in the use of Goals 2000 money. Some members said they were encouraged, but not completely reassured, by the changes. A written guarantee to completely stay out of Virginia's affairs, they said, would help ease their doubts.
``Many of us are pleased that things are moving in the right direction,'' said board member Kay Coles James, dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University. ``But there are still a great many concerns that exist about the autonomy of the state and the potential for interference. ...We need to know what those [conditions] are.''
James proposed the resolution to ask the government for the guarantee.
Robley Jones, president of the Virginia Education Association, the state's largest teachers' group, called it a cynical ploy intended to go nowhere.
``I just think it's a calculated move to make the [federal] Department of Education an offer that they can't accept,'' Jones said. He also complained that while the state board is arguing against micro-management, its plan would force all Virginia's schools to spend the money in one area.
The Goals 2000 program is designed to improve the nation's public schools by funding a variety of projects, including technology and teacher training. Virginia and New Hampshire initially rejected Goals 2000 money, and the Montana legislature recently voted to refuse the money. Other states that initially accepted the money, including Louisiana and Alabama, are reconsidering.
Opposition to the program has accompanied the mushrooming movement to reduce federal involvement in areas ranging from gun control to welfare. Goals 2000 critics say they fear that the Clinton administration will use the program to wrest control of school districts or force them to use controversial teaching methods such as ``outcomes-based education.''
But supporters say that federal officials have repeatedly promised a ``hands-off'' policy, and that Virginia schools could use the money. They also point to the recent changes in federal law that allow states to get the money without submitting an improvement plan and specify that no one would be required to teach ``outcomes-based education.''
Another amendment makes the actions of the state board itself more important: Now, local school districts can get Goals 2000 money - despite the opposition of a governor - if they have the approval of the state board of education.
In Virginia, about two-thirds of school districts - including Norfolk, Portsmouth and Suffolk - have asked Allen to accept the money.
The latest installment in the long-running discussion about Goals 2000 lasted less than 15 minutes Thursday. It was dominated by two local members of the board - James and Norfolk attorney Peter G. Decker Jr., who says there's no reason not to apply for the funds.
``I say, why not take the money?'' he said. ``If we find out that the U.S. government is asking for too much, then we can give it back. Are the other 48 states idiots, are they so wrong, that they are accepting these monies?''
A handful of spectators, some wearing signs with a slash across ``Goals 2000,'' shouted no as Decker spoke, but he kept on: ``When I find I'm the only one with a different uniform on, I look in the mirror. Let's look in the mirror.''
Decker voted against the resolution. So did board member Lee Ware, who strongly opposed involvement in Goals 2000. ``I think this is as good a place as any to say: This is where we're going to stop,'' he said.
Board president Michelle Easton, a longtime opponent, said after the meeting that she'd be open to reconsidering the matter if the government agreed to the board's requests. But she appeared skeptical.
``Don't tell us there are no strings if there are strings,'' said Easton, a former employee of the U.S. Department of Education under President Reagan. ``I worked there for seven years and I never, ever saw a program with no strings.''
LENGTH: Medium: 86 linesby CNB