OPENING STATEMENT

JOINT SENATE-HOUSE INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT SAIKI

JUNE 19, 2001

At the outset, we would like to emphasize that the Legislature fully supports special education programs because we know that these services give our students the opportunity to reach their full potential.

This investigative committee is evidence of our support for special education.

The Legislature formed this committee pursuant to Senate Concurrent Resolution 65 that was adopted this past legislative session.

The purpose of this committee is to examine the State Administration's management and implementation of the Felix v. Cayetano special education consent decree.

This unusual process of establishing a joint Senate-House committee is a direct result of the Department of Education and Department of Health’s inability to answer our concerns about how they are handling this federal mandate.

The Felix consent decree is the outcome of a lawsuit filed against the State of Hawaii in federal district court in 1993 for the State's apparent violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). This federal law requires educational jurisdictions to provide educational, mental health, and related services to disabled children. DOE and DOH have the primary responsibility for implementing the requirements of IDEA and the consent decree.

In May 2000, despite the fact that the Legislature had appropriated over $1 billion since 1994 to allow the Administration to comply with the consent decree, the federal district court found the State to be in contempt because it had not complied.

At this juncture, the question must be asked:

“Why are we not in compliance after we have spent over $1 billion ?”

We owe it to our taxpayers and special education students to find the answer to this question.

To try and answer this question, State Auditor Marion Higa performed two separate audits in 1998 and 2001. The audits noted the problems encountered by the Administration in implementing the IDEA.

The latest Auditor's report raised grave concerns as to whether the services provided to special education children are appropriate and effective. The Auditor found that the Administration lacks adequate financial management controls, the class of children covered by the consent decree is too broad, and conflicts of interest may inflate the cost and scope of services provided to students.

The Felix consent decree is now the State's No. 1 public policy issue. I'd like to explain why.

First, enormous State spending for special education threatens funding for other valuable State services. Expenditures for Felix-related services have dramatically increased from $181 million in 1995 to over $302 million in 2000. It appears this trend will continue in 2001. With this rate of growth, this one program may drain the State's financial resources away from regular education and university programs. We need to make sure that the level of funding is necessary.

Second, the Legislature has not received a reasonable explanation for the tremendous growth in the special education student population. The number of Felix students has increased over the past five years from 1,800 to 12,000, and up to 10,000 additional special education students may be receiving some Felix-related services. However, the Auditor found that the consent decree does not clearly define which students are eligible for special education services. We need to determine if this is true.

Third, we don’t know if services are effective. The Auditor found no evidence that students have actually benefited from special education services. We need to find out why.

Fourth, the Legislature has received complaints of abuse and waste. Principals, teachers, parents, and others in Hawaii's public school system have complained that the mounting special education funds are not well-spent. They are concerned that the system may be benefiting private providers who receive contracts, as opposed to students. It is our responsibility to listen to these educators and parents, and to address their concerns.

This committee is an extension of the Legislature's constitutional duty to ensure that taxpayer's funds are used effectively and properly. The Legislature will not deny resources to special education students if those resources assist them in achieving their full potential. But the Legislature must be assured that the Administration is spending these funds appropriately, and that taxpayer dollars are not being abused or wasted.

We believe that the entire public will benefit from such scrutiny.

2