March 17, 2005, Introduced by Senators HARDIMAN, KUIPERS, CASSIS, BIRKHOLZ, McMANUS, ALLEN, VAN WOERKOM, GOSCHKA and BISHOP and referred to the Committee on Education.
A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled
"The state school aid act of 1979,"
by amending section 11f (MCL 388.1611f), as amended by 2004 PA 351.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
Sec. 11f. (1) From the appropriations under section 11, there
is allocated for the purposes of this section an amount not to
exceed $32,000,000.00 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005
and for each succeeding fiscal year through the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2008. Payments under this section will cease after
September 30, 2008. These allocations are for paying the amounts
described in subsection (4) to districts and intermediate
districts, other than those receiving a lump sum payment under
subsection (2), that were not plaintiffs in the consolidated cases
known as Durant v State of Michigan, Michigan supreme court docket
no. 104458-104492 and that, on or before March 2, 1998, submitted
to the state treasurer a board resolution waiving any right or
interest the district or intermediate district has or may have in
any claim or litigation based on or arising out of any claim or
potential claim through September 30, 1997 that is or was similar
to the claims asserted by the plaintiffs in the consolidated cases
known as Durant v State of Michigan. The waiver resolution shall be
in form and substance as required under subsection (7). The state
treasurer is authorized to accept such a waiver resolution on
behalf of this state. The amounts described in this subsection
represent offers of settlement and compromise of any claim or
claims that were or could have been asserted by these districts and
intermediate districts, as described in this subsection.
(2) In addition to any other money appropriated under this
act, there was appropriated from the state school aid fund an
amount not to exceed $1,700,000.00 for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 1999. This appropriation was for paying the amounts
described in this subsection to districts and intermediate
districts that were not plaintiffs in the consolidated cases known
as Durant v State of Michigan; that, on or before March 2, 1998,
submitted to the state treasurer a board resolution waiving any
right or interest the district or intermediate district had or may
have had in any claim or litigation based on or arising out of any
claim or potential claim through September 30, 1997 that is or was
similar to the claims asserted by the plaintiffs in the
consolidated cases known as Durant v State of Michigan; and for
which the total amount listed in section 11h and paid under this
section was less than $75,000.00. For a district or intermediate
district qualifying for a payment under this subsection, the entire
amount listed for the district or intermediate district in section
11h was paid in a lump sum on November 15, 1998 or on the next
business day following that date. The amounts paid under this
subsection represent offers of settlement and compromise of any
claim or claims that were or could have been asserted by these
districts and intermediate districts, as described in this
subsection.
(3) This section does not create any obligation or liability
of this state to any district or intermediate district that does
not submit a waiver resolution described in this section. This
section, any other provision of this act, and section 353e of the
management and budget act, 1984 PA 431, MCL 18.1353e, are not
intended to admit liability or waive any defense that is or would
be available to this state or its agencies, employees, or agents in
any litigation or future litigation with a district or intermediate
district.
(4) The amount paid each fiscal year to each district or
intermediate district under subsection (1) shall be 1/20 of the
total amount listed in section 11h for each listed district or
intermediate district that qualifies for a payment under subsection
(1). The amounts listed in section 11h and paid in part under this
subsection and in a lump sum under subsection (2) are offers of
settlement and compromise to each of these districts or
intermediate districts to resolve, in their entirety, any claim or
claims that these districts or intermediate districts may have
asserted for violations of section 29 of article IX of the state
constitution of 1963 through September 30, 1997, which claims are
or were similar to the claims asserted by the plaintiffs in the
consolidated cases known as Durant v State of Michigan. This
section, any other provision of this act, and section 353e of the
management and budget act, 1984 PA 431, MCL 18.1353e, shall not be
construed to constitute an admission of liability to the districts
or intermediate districts listed in section 11h or a waiver of any
defense that is or would have been available to the state or its
agencies, employees, or agents in any litigation or future
litigation with a district or intermediate district.
(5) The entire amount of each payment under subsection (1)
each fiscal year shall be paid on November 15 of the applicable
fiscal year or on the next business day following that date.
(6) Funds paid to a district or intermediate district under
this section shall be used only for textbooks, electronic
instructional material, software, technology, infrastructure or
infrastructure improvements, school buses, school security,
training for technology, an early learning success program
described in subsection (8), or to pay debt service on voter-
approved bonds issued by the district or intermediate district
before the effective date of this section. For intermediate
districts only, funds paid under this section may also be used for
other nonrecurring instructional expenditures including, but not
limited to, nonrecurring instructional expenditures for vocational
education, or for debt service for acquisition of technology for
academic support services. Funds received by an intermediate
district under this section may be used for projects conducted for
the benefit of its constituent districts at the discretion of the
intermediate board. To the extent payments under this section are
used by a district or intermediate district to pay debt service on
debt payable from millage revenues, and to the extent permitted by
law, the district or intermediate district may make a corresponding
reduction in the number of mills levied for that debt service.
(7) The resolution to be adopted and submitted by a district
or intermediate district under this section and section 11g shall
read as follows:
"Whereas, the board of ____________________ (name of district
or intermediate district) desires to settle and compromise, in
their entirety, any claim or claims that the district (or
intermediate district) has or had for violations of section 29 of
article IX of the state constitution of 1963, which claim or claims
are or were similar to the claims asserted by the plaintiffs in the
consolidated cases known as Durant v State of Michigan, Michigan
supreme court docket no. 104458-104492.
Whereas, the district (or intermediate district) agrees to
settle and compromise these claims for the consideration described
in sections 11f and 11g of the state school aid act of 1979, 1979
PA 94, MCL 388.1611f and 388.1611g, and in the amount specified for
the district (or intermediate district) in section 11h of the state
school aid act of 1979, 1979 PA 94, MCL 388.1611h.
Whereas, the board of _______________ (name of district or
intermediate district) is authorized to adopt this resolution.
Now, therefore, be it resolved as follows:
1. The board of ____________________ (name of district or
intermediate district) waives any right or interest it may have in
any claim or potential claim through September 30, 1997 relating to
the amount of funding the district or intermediate district is, or
may have been, entitled to receive under the state school aid act
of 1979, 1979 PA 94, MCL 388.1601 to 388.1772, or any other source
of state funding, by reason of the application of section 29 of
article IX of the state constitution of 1963, which claims or
potential claims are or were similar to the claims asserted by the
plaintiffs in the consolidated cases known as Durant v State of
Michigan, Michigan supreme court docket no. 104458-104492.
2. The board of ____________________ (name of district or
intermediate district) directs its secretary to submit a certified
copy of this resolution to the state treasurer no later than 5 p.m.
eastern standard time on March 2, 1998, and agrees that it will not
take any action to amend or rescind this resolution.
3. The board of ____________________ (name of district or
intermediate district) expressly agrees and understands that, if it
takes any action to amend or rescind this resolution, the state,
its agencies, employees, and agents shall have available to them
any privilege, immunity, and/or defense that would otherwise have
been available had the claims or potential claims been actually
litigated in any forum.
4. This resolution is contingent on continued payments by the
state each fiscal year as determined under sections 11f and 11g of
the state school aid act of 1979, 1979 PA 94, MCL 388.1611f and
388.1611g. However, this resolution shall be an irrevocable waiver
of any claim to amounts actually received by the school district or
intermediate school district under sections 11f and 11g of the
state school aid act of 1979.".
(8) An early learning success program that uses funds received
under this section shall monitor individual pupil learning and
provide specific support or learning strategies to pupils as early
as possible in order to reduce the need for special education
placement. The program shall include literacy and numeracy
supports, sensory motor skill development, behavior supports,
instructional consultation for teachers, and the development of a
parent/school learning plan.