The Board of Education last night voted unanimously in support of a resolution that urges voters in November to reject Amendment 31, a proposed change to the Colorado Constitution that would mandate that English language learners attend regular classrooms after one year of intensive instruction conducted in English.

The proposed Amendment "ignores the individual learning needs of children; conflicts with Denver's federal court-ordered program; severely limits parental choice; changes current constitutional provisions calling for local control of education; and will eliminate current and future dual language programs," said the resolution, which also urged voters to reject the proposal at the ballot box in November.

Approval of the resolution followed a special meeting Wednesday, Sept. 4 when the Board quizzed proponents and opponents of the proposed Amendment and heard from nearly 50 individual community members, the majority of whom spoke against the proposal.

When the time came to vote, Board members were unequivocal.

"I believe in Denver parents, I believe in choice, I do not believe in this amendment," said Board member James Mejia. At a time when government web sites are being published in Spanish, when courts are ordering Spanish translations for election ballots, and when top radio stations serve Spanish-speaking audiences, he added, "this initiative flies in the face of learning other languages, other cultures, and would stymie learning in any other language."

Board member Les Woodward pointed out that an independent legal counsel found that the ballot language is "too vague to be implemented" and that "there are a number of terms throughout the amendment that are unclear." Courts will certainly be needed to interpret the amendment's true meaning, he said. "This is really bad constitutional law and we really need to oppose it for that reason alone, in addition to all the educational limitations it creates," he said.

To the notion that the proposed Amendment allows parents to ask for an option out of immersion programs, Woodward said parents should not be misled. "I do not believe that anybody...could reasonably conclude that there is a possibility of having waivers, especially for children under the age of ten," he said.

Board member Sue Edwards said the only area of agreement between the authors of the proposed amendment and Denver Public Schools is that both agree it's important that students who don't speak English learn the new language as quickly as possible.

But the amendment presents many problems, she said, including "the constraints on parental choice, the impact on local control, the financial impact on school districts, the thought of bad law and putting it into our constitution."

In short, she said, the amendment is "poorly crafted, poorly thought out, punitive in nature and will not serve the children well."

Colorado voters, cautioned Board member Michelle Moss, should read the whole proposal. "I can tell you that my greatest concern in this election is that this initiative would be passed by the citizens of Colorado without fully understanding what it does," she said.

The proposal, she said "tricks us into thinking that one year (of immersion) is enough...and we know that isn't true." Added Moss: "What I think we don't want is a one-size fits all program that may or may not serve the needs of our children."

Prior to being elected, Board member Kevin Patterson recalled that he printed out campaign fliers promoting his support of expanding school choices in the district. Amendment 31 would limit choice, he said, "and this goes against what I decided I would do as a member of the Board of Education ... Just because something may be legal doesn't mean that (it's) right."
Board member Lucia Guzman warned that the proposal would "endanger this district." While she conceded that the current English Language Acquisition program needs improvement – as did Superintendent Jerry Wartgow during comments later – she said the proposed Amendment is "not the right way" to serve English language learners.

The next 20 years will bring even more diversity to the district, said Guzman, and the district should be "working on a better solution to enhance and embrace the kinds of children" who are on the way.

As the Board member who represents northwest Denver, home to Academia Ana Marie Sandoval, she also criticized authors of the amendment for their "audacity" in writing a proposal that has the potential to end the highly successful Dual Language program that is taught there.

"I strongly urge the voters of Denver and the voters of Colorado to read beyond the very beginning of this proposed amendment," said Board President Elaine Gantz Berman. "This is a very, very dangerous law if this goes into effect."
She pointed out that the amendment will impact virtually every school district in the state because most districts use a sheltered English approach for English language learners – an approach that would be banned in favor of immersion.

"The devils are in the details of this amendment," said Berman. "It is very dangerous and it will be very harmful for kids."

Superintendent Jerry Wartgow said his concerns about the Amendment had grown during the course of the Board's exploration of the proposal.

"This amendment is poorly drafted, it's extremely ambiguous, and there are numerous terms that are not defined and it will certainly result in a legal quagmire that will bog us down in this state for years to come," he said.

The "extreme requirements" for waivers to be granted and the severe penalties facing those who might grant waivers and later encounter a lawsuit "effectively eliminate choice," he said.

"This is not a Latino issue, this is not a Mexican issue," said Superintendent Wartgow, "this is an issue for all parents in the state of Colorado."

During the evening public hearing last night, Denver Classroom Teachers Association Becky Wissink applauded the Board for taking a "strong, passionate stand" against the proposed amendment. "Amendment 31 is not the right solution," she said.

The complete text of the Board resolution follows:

WHEREAS, in November the citizens of Colorado will vote on a proposed Amendment to Article IX of the Colorado Constitution called the English Language Education Initiative; and

WHEREAS, Denver Public Schools supports the concept that children should acquire English as quickly as possible; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Education has carefully reviewed this proposed Amendment and has held a hearing at which the drafters and proponents of the Amendment, as well as opponents of the Amendment, have testified and answered questions from the members of the Board; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Education has considered the possible impact of the proposed Amendment on the English language instruction programs available to students in Denver Public Schools; and

WHEREAS, the Board has considered the reduced options that would be available to their parents if the Amendment is approved; and

WHEREAS, the proposed Amendment requires that all children who are learning English shall be educated through sheltered English immersion during a temporary transition period not normally intended to exceed one year, and would assign virtually all English learners to classrooms taught "overwhelmingly in English," regardless of their individual needs, the advice of professionals, the determination of local school boards, or the wishes of parents; and

WHEREAS, this proposed Amendment permits parents/guardians to apply for waivers in only three situations: (1) where the child already knows English (child scores at or above the state average for his/her grade level), (2) the child is ten years old or older, or (3) after spending thirty (30) days in an English classroom if the school principal, educational staff and superintendent believe that the child has special and individual physical or psychological needs above and beyond the child's lack of English proficiency; and

WHEREAS, the proposed Amendment provides no definition of the term "special and individual physical or psychological needs" nor any additional description of how these needs might be identified or determined; and

WHEREAS, the proponents of the Amendment could not describe, under repeated questioning from the Superintendent and the Board of Education, a single student who might be eligible for a waiver under exception (3) above; and

WHEREAS, the personal liability provision of the proposed Amendment makes it extremely unlikely that any school official would risk granting waivers, effectively mandating the immersion program described in the Amendment as the only instructional method for teaching English to English language learners; and

WHEREAS, although the proposed Amendment prohibits school officials from granting waivers except in very restrictive circumstances, school officials can deny waivers for any reason or no reason at all; and

WHEREAS, the Amendment provides that for ten years after a special-needs waiver is granted a parent or legal guardian who requested a waiver may sue individuals granting a special needs waiver if the parent or legal guardian later concludes that the waiver was granted in error and injured the child's education; and

WHEREAS, approval by voters of this Amendment would dismantle the educational program at Academia Ana Marie Sandoval, a Dual Language school developed and organized by community members in northwest Denver that enjoys strong parental support and after just one full year of operation has attracted a long waiting list of potential students; and

WHEREAS, the District is operating under a federal court order to implement a particular English Language Acquisition Program that begins transitioning students into English the first day they enroll in the program and provides parental right to choose among sheltered English immersion classes, traditional native language, and/or all instruction in English as the method of instruction for their children; and

WHEREAS, the Amendment would require the district to spend money on a program but provides no new revenue to pay for the program's implementation, amounting to an unfunded mandate; and

WHEREAS, this Amendment would eliminate all choices for parents of English language learners who seek options other than the immersion program described in the Amendment; and

WHEREAS, the Amendment would eliminate local control of education from duly elected school boards throughout the state of Colorado,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Education for School District No.1 for the City and County of Denver, expresses its strong opposition to the proposed Amendment because it ignores the individual learning needs of children; conflicts with Denver's federal court-ordered program; severely limits parental choice; changes current constitutional provisions calling for local control of education; and will eliminate current and future dual language programs. Further, this Board of Education urges the voters in Denver and across the state of Colorado to reject this proposed amendment in November.