Texas House Bill HB2020

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/1/11
• Refer: 3/7/11

Caption

Relating to state aid for certain juvenile justice alternative education programs that enter into certain revenue sharing agreements.

Impact

Should HB2020 be enacted, it is likely to have a significant impact on the financial viability of juvenile justice alternative education programs within the state. By formalizing the funding structure and ensuring that these programs receive aid comparable to earlier levels, the bill recognizes the importance of these educational settings in providing support for at-risk youth. Moreover, it may encourage more programs to enter into revenue sharing agreements, potentially expanding access to necessary resources for a broader range of students.

Summary

House Bill 2020 addresses the provision of state aid for certain juvenile justice alternative education programs that participate in specific revenue sharing agreements. Primarily targeting programs that received funding due to arrangements between school districts in previous years, the bill aims to ensure these programs continue to receive financial support necessary for their operation. The funding structure is designed to provide aid based on differences in funding levels from a historical baseline established during the 2005-2006 school year, with determinations made by the commissioner of education.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB2020 appears to be generally supportive among educators and advocates for juvenile justice reform. Many stakeholders emphasize the importance of maintaining funding for alternative education programs, especially given the challenges faced by at-risk youth. However, there may be some concerns among legislators about budgeting and resource allocation, particularly regarding the sustainability of funding over the long term, as financial resources are often limited.

Contention

While there seems to be a consensus on the need for continued support for juvenile justice alternative education programs, the bill could face scrutiny concerning its funding mechanisms and how it fits within the broader context of educational finance reform. Additionally, the final determination of aid by the commissioner of education—without an avenue for appeal—could raise questions about accountability and fairness in the allocation of resources, highlighting a potential contention point among stakeholders.