There's a bill before the Indiana legislature that would set a bad precedent.

I hesitated to write about it because it affects newspapers and it may seem a bit self-serving. But I truly believe it's a bad piece of lawmaking.

It's SB 391, which was amended in the Indiana House to give schools "flexibility" to not publish school performance reports in local newspapers if they choose.

Instead, they could mail parents a copy. Of course that would leave the majority of taxpayers in the community without a copy of the report. If they wanted one, they would have to come to a public meeting, stop by the school administration office and pick one up or look for it on the Internet.

Now, at first blush one might think this sounds reasonable and isn't that bad of a bill. One might also think that the reason I'm against it is because this newspaper would lose advertising revenue. It is true we would lose a small fraction of our revenue.

But the taxpaying public would lose much more. This bill really would set a pretty terrible precedent. It's simply bad public policy.

If this bill passes, it will be the classic case of the slippery slope. If schools are able to circumvent public notice requirements, it won't be long before other government agencies will be asking the legislature for their exemptions. Soon, newspapers would be left with notices informing interested taxpayers that public information is available to be picked up at their county courthouse or their schools.

School and teacher lobbyists were able to get this bill amended in the House education committee to include the flexibility proposals.

One must wonder why.

The main complaint of the Indiana School Boards Association and the Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents was that it was costly to publish the performance reports (about $2,000 for the largest school corporations). But I wonder, would it be all that much cheaper and easier to mail one to every student's parents and make one available for everyone else?

Another complaint voiced by proponents of the flexibility legislation is that "nobody reads the public notice advertisements."

If that is the case, and the published reports are not widely read by the public in the newspaper, wouldn't even fewer taxpayers read them under the flexibility plan? In any given community, only about 20 percent of taxpayers have children in schools. That would mean that 80 percent of taxpayers would have to take the proactive step of running down to the school to get a copy of the report.

If the concern is that not enough people read the reports, then the flexibility legislation is a step in quite the wrong direction.

And as far as making the reports available, schools in Indiana don't have a really stellar track record in that regard anyway. Large daily newspapers across the state recently tested the compliance of public officials with open records laws. They found that one in seven schools failed to make available copies of school board minutes. How many would schools would hand over a performance report to taxpayers forced to request a copy under SB 391?

The Hoosier State Press Association is lobbying against SB 391 as amended.

They also offer some viable alternatives.

The cost factor is a valid concern and could be addressed by a change of format. Publication requirements could be changed to allow a scaled down performance report. In addition, costs could be reduced by newspapers working together with schools to find businesses willing to sponsor the advertising. This would give the information better visibility and gives businesses a chance to position themselves as proponents of education accountability.

Way back in the 1920s, the Indiana General Assembly determined what information should be placed in the public's hands. It also determined the most effective means of doing that was publication in local newspapers. I believe, despite all the changes in technology, newspapers still are the most effective means of reaching the general public.

SB 391 seeks to undermine that basic premise. It also asks lawmakers to let schools decide how best to inform the public of their activities.

That's a task I think is best left to the lawmakers. After all, the taxpayers are paying the schools' bills.

On Thursday, the bill passed on second reading and needs only to pass on a simple majority in the house on third reading. That vote could happen as early as Monday. If it passes it heads to the Senate.

If you don't want your access to school performance reports limited by this legislation, give your state representative and state senator a call. [[In-content Ad]]