|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Delegate Morgan,
I thought that Delegate Maurer was point-
ing to the highly important concept, namely
that under 4.20 you were dealing with
heads of principal departments and that
you were identifying what a principal de-
partment is, and at this point it would be
significant to make it clear that though
education might be thought of as a prin-
cipal department, nevertheless it would not
be headed up within the sphere of refer-
ence indicated here.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: That can be ac-
complished under the section 4.20 as it
exists in the copy, because by the phrase
"unless otherwise provided by law", you
are not proposing to freeze the existing
organization of the educational system in
the constitution, are you?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: I would say that
here is where Delegate Maurer and I are
as one: namely, we believe that the situa-
tion that exists now ought not be tampered
with in respect to boards heading up the
department.
That is correct.
Are we freezing it forever, no. The con-
stitution could be amended on this point,
but this point is such an integral basic
consideration in higher education that it
ought to be made clear in the constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Is it not true
that under your amendment you permit
boards to head principal departments?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Other than educa-
tion?
THE CHAIRMAN : Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Other than edu-
cation, yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: That is correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Is it also true
that under your amendment the Board of
Education could head a principal depart-
ment?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
|
DELEGATE BARD: It might be re-
ferred to as a principal department, yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: And then how
does it differ from the blue copy?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Delegate Morgan,
it differs in the very respect that Delegate
Maurer wanted to make clear, namely, that
there would be a board which would head
it up. This would be the exception.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan, if
the Chairman could interrupt, perhaps
reaching the end of the colloquy, I think
Delegate Bard is suggesting a difference.
Under the section as it is presently drafted
the legislature could provide a single ex-
ecutive as the head of the public school
system.
Under his amendment the legislature
could not provide a single executive as the
head of the school system, or at least that
is what he intended.
Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: That is correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. Chairman,
I would like to ask what is his intention,
whether it was his intention to freeze the
existing organization of the existing educa-
tional system? I thought his answer was no.
THE CHAIRMAN: He does not intend
to freeze it. You would necessarily have a
board of the same number of members you
have now. He does intend to freeze it
where you do have a board.
Is that correct, Dr. Bard?
DELEGATE BARD: That is correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. President,
I will ask Delegate Bard, suppose at some
time in the future the legislature in its
wisdom decided to do away with the exist-
ing state school board and have the school
system run by a director of education.
Do you mean to tell me that it would be
wise to say that that cannot be done in
this constitutional provision?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard?
DELEGATE BARD: Delegate Morgan,
I think your question lies at the heart of
the troubles more than anything else. You
|
