|
|
House Education Committees Senate Education Committees |
||||
Governor Dayton's Seven-point Plan for Education Reform -- Better Schools for a Better Minnesota |
||||||
1.30.12 Update -- Constitutional Amendments: Minnefornia? -- You need to have a conversation with the GOP legislator nearest you.
With a week under their belt, the GOP majorities are starting to look at adding constitutional amendment questions to November’s ballot. A question about the definition of marriage is already on the ballot, and now GOP leaders are considering which and how many to add to the ballot. Constitutional ballot questions do not require a signature by the Governor to be placed on the ballot. For the first time in at least 40 years, the GOP controls both bodies of the legislature and sees this as an opportunity to solidify aspects of their agenda into the constitution. Any given election could change the current dynamic, and this opportunity may not come around again for some time.
Beyond a policy agenda, campaign strategy is another consideration for political leaders. What are the advantages and disadvantages to constitutional ballot questions? A new legislative map comes out on February 21, and legislators will find themselves with new “turf” to learn. One line of thinking is that by dividing DFL campaign efforts between defeating ballot questions and electing new challengers, the GOP incumbents will gain an edge. Another line of thinking is that ballot questions draw out independent voters to the election which can lead to unpredictability, which incumbents don’t like. Certain ballot questions, such as “right to work”, could cause the largest union political mobilization efforts seen in a long time.
Senate Majority Leader Dave Senjem (GOP Rochester) recently said he believes that two ballot questions are all they should move forward with. In the same breath he mentioned the popularity of “voter ID.” Governor Dayton vetoed an election bill last session because it would have required voters to provide ID before voting. Legislators in both parties know from their own pollsters how popular voter ID is. The DFL may try to head this amendment off by finding compromise language that can go into statute instead of the constitution. GOP leaders say photo ID is needed to safeguard the election process. DFLers argue it will disenfranchise elderly and low income people who may not have a state issued ID. Local government officials complain about the costs associated with enforcing such a mandate.
Fighting for third place on the ballot and a potential #2 spot should voter ID work its way through the legislative process are two questions. Making Minnesota a “right to work” state whereby union membership is voluntary is a favored question by many conservatives and business groups. The politics are dicey though, and some don’t want to light a fire under rank and file union members. A second question would impact the legislature’s budget making process. One approach would be to require a super majority (60 or 67%) of legislators in both bodies to vote affirmatively on state tax increases (income and sales are the two largest). Another option for the budget question would say that the legislature can only spend up to 98% of available revenues in any given year.
There’s a lot to say and argue about on each of these amendments. However, from a rural school perspective, the questions pertaining to the budget process are the most concerning. Rural schools are highly reliant on state aid for basic support, and the legislature controls the rules over how schools can generate local property tax revenue (more on that fight later). Consider how frustrating and time consuming the referendum process has been over the last decade. This is largely due to the fact that state budgets have been running in the red. It’s extremely difficult to get a tax increase through the legislature under the current simple majority requirement. To break a special session budget deadlock in 2003, Governor Pawlenty acquiesced to a “health impact fee” on tobacco products. In 2007, six House GOP members joined the DFL majority and voted to override Pawlenty’s veto of a gas tax increase supported by business groups across the state. Only one of them remains to tell about it today. Senate DFLers had a veto proof majority of 45 that year (they have 30 members today – things can change fast). In 2008, voters approved the “Legacy Amendment” which raised the sales tax to support outdoor heritage and cultural legacy projects and programs.
It is extremely difficult to raise tax rates at the capitol. It is extremely difficult to add products, services and transactions into the current tax mix as well. If a super majority is required to pass a tax bill that has the net effect of raising revenue, then tax reform is almost certainly gone. The metro area, slated to gain new legislative turf under the new map, is more concerned with sales and income tax rates than property taxes. Metro property taxes are spread over a huge residential and commercial & industrial tax base. A budget amendment will harm MREA’s long term mission of creating equity in the education funding system. Districts will become more and more reliant on property taxes. Opportunities for rural students could be squeezed as rural communities fight over local taxes. Rural communities already struggle immensely with local tax base issues; publicly owned land, Seasonal & Recreational property, agriculture production land valuations and more elderly living on fixed incomes.
If your rural legislator is sensitive to the impacts felt this fall by the loss of the Homestead Market Value Credit, they have a 50/50 shot at the Capitol of doing something about it. Under any of these budget amendments they will have to secure the support of their metro-majority counterparts to do something about it. Talk to your legislator soon, and ask them not to put rural Minnesota’s economic future in such a political imbalance. If this amendment doesn’t move forward, it will be because rural GOP members band together and pressure their leadership to abandon this one.
Emerging Issues
Business groups and national reform organizations are pushing HF 1870 this session. The bill would change tenure for teachers in Minnesota. Supporters of the bill want to end what they call LIFO or “Last In First Out” practices whereby staffing decisions are based solely on seniority. HF 1870 is up Tuesday morning in the House Education Reform committee.
HF 1860 was heard last week and would send referendum dollars to students attending charter schools in their resident district. Expect more challenges to school district referendum authority to bubble up this year. HF 1858 is floating around and it would only allow districts to hold referendum elections during a general election (even numbered years). We expect this bill to be heard soon.
The legislature is sorting through these in the initial stages. While many of these bills are controversial, none have the power of a constitutional amendment, and all will require agreement of the House, Senate, and Governor to become law. Therefore, keep your eye on the constitutional amendments affecting budgets and taxes, and get close to the GOP legislators who represent you or are near you. They are the only votes that count in the constitutional amendment game.
Update 1.23.12 -- 2012 Legislature Open for Business
At noon on Tuesday, the 2012 legislative session will officially begin. Work is already under way in the House and Senate on reform measures the GOP is calling “Reform 2.0”. You can follow Reform 2.0 at www.reform2.mn. Included in this legislative package are some familiar and a few new proposals for K-12 education.
GOP leaders are calling for new governance of the Minneapolis and St. Paul school districts. Arguing that good things have happened in Boston, New York City and Washington D.C., they want to give the mayors RT Rybak and Chris Coleman authority to run their respective schools systems. The governance changes don’t stop there. They also want to give parents whose kids attend “failing schools” the ability to petition (not sure who – board? mayor? MDE?) to convert their school into a charter school. A similar change was made in Orange County, California, a few years back. Interestingly enough, the Orange County superintendent is now saying they will back off of chartering local buildings if the union agrees to local building authority and flexibility from the master bargaining agreement.
Earlier, in the fall, the Star Tribune and others reported on a broad based community movement in Minneapolis to force the school board to change the teacher’s contract to eliminate “last in, first out” policies. This is another marquee issue for the GOP this session and was pre-filed as a new bill for this year (HF 1870). Also in the mix is a proposal to have referendum dollars follow a resident student to a charter school within the boundaries of their resident district (HF 1860). In fact, HF 1860 is the first bill the House K-12 Finance committee will review this session and it’s on the agenda for Tuesday the 24th.
All told, the Reform 2.0 package is mostly targeted at Minneapolis and St. Paul. GOP leaders are frustrated over how much the two districts receive in per pupil aid and the lack of academic results. Therefore, reforming these two systems continues to be a major focus of their attention. Greater Minnesota schools face challenges as well and could be impacted by these proposed changes in law. Pay for performance is still on the Reform 2.0 list, but nothing specific was mentioned at the press conference. A statewide expansion of QComp was proposed by Governor Pawlenty in his last two years in office.
What was missing from the GOP reform 2.0 press conference was any mention of additional constitutional amendments for this fall’s ballot. A question about the definition of marriage is already on the ballot. Additional questions could be to make Minnesota a “right to work” state, which the unions strongly oppose, and another question that, if adopted, would require voters to present identification at the polls before being allowed to vote. Lastly, and of most concern from the perspective of school finance stability, is a question that, if adopted, would require a “super-majority” vote in both the House and Senate to pass any state tax increase. MREA will publish more information on this topic in a separate issues brief.
2012 Session Calendar
The first two weeks of the session will start slowly, and the legislature is going on break Thursday, February 2nd through Tuesday, February 7th. They want to give themselves plenty of time to prepare for and work their precinct caucuses, which take place Tuesday the 7th at 7pm. This is a major election year for all involved, except the Governor, and they will be running on new legislative maps. The new map is scheduled for release on February 21. You can anticipate your legislator’s attention will drift at that point, unless they are planning on retiring. Several legislators have already announced their retirement after this session including longtime public education advocate Rep. Mindy Greiling.
When they return from precinct caucuses the session will go from a jog into a full blow sprint through March. Committee deadlines will come very quickly, and we can expect a flurry of education reforms to move their way through the process. Senate leaders have discussed trying to wrap up session by April 2. However, the House is planning on taking a long break at that point for Easter and then coming back on Monday, April 16th and working through April 30th. The bonding bill is the major piece of legislation they traditionally need to get done in the even numbered session. Governor Dayton is proposing $775 million in projects. GOP leaders are considering an amount much lower than that, in the range of $350-500 million. Regardless of when in April they adjourn, it doesn’t look like this session will drag on through May. The state constitution says they must be done by May 21st.
Concurrent Enrollment Draws High Praise
Secretary Arnie Duncan, Governor Mark Dayton and Commissioner Brenda Cassellius were at Irondale High School, in the Mounds View School District, on Friday, January 20, to celebrate Early College at Irondale HS. Early College is a concurrent enrollment program where students receive college credit from the Anoka Ramsey Community College while taking classes in high school. “This program is one of the state’s most comprehensive partnerships between a high school and our state colleges,” according to Dr. Steven Rosenstone, Chancellor of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities. Early College provides students a two year AA degree when they graduate from High School, and it targets students in the upper 70% of the class to be more inclusive.
In front of an audience of about 400 educators and students, Early College was touted as Minnesota’s first concurrent enrollment program to provide an AA degree at High School graduation. Not quite the first, as I found out afterwards from Larry Lundblad, President of Central Lakes Community College and Kristil McDonald, principal of Clearbrook-Gonvick High School. 50 students in a variety of Central Minnesota High Schools graduated this spring with AA degrees from Central Lakes Community College. In fact, Larry shared the Central Lake’s model with Irondale as they were setting up Early College.
Greater Minnesota has known the value of our community and technical colleges for at least two generations, and concurrent enrollment has been in our high schools for at least twenty years now. We know that concurrent enrollment is cost-effective for schools and students, and gets students started on their post-secondary education early. We now have multiple models to take this to the next level with concurrent diplomas and AA degrees. Hooray for those who got efforts started, and encouragement to all schools to further develop their concurrent enrollment programs in High School.
Update 1/9/12 -- Imagine a 2013 legislative session where both parties are pledged to find additional revenue to repay the $2.1 Billion payment shift on a schedule. You can help that to come about by attending a precinct caucus. Set aside Tuesday evening, February 7, 2012, 7 pm, for Precinct Caucuses. This is where all politics in Minnesota begin: the precinct caucuses.
This is where caucus attendees:
Since “MREA is the collaboration of Greater Minnesota school boards, teachers and administrators which puts the education, growth and development of learners first,” each of you has a choice of whether to attend a precinct caucus.
For administrators, it is an easy choice to take a pass. You are responsible for implementing policy regardless of the political party in power, so take the night off. You can provide information to teachers and board members who are attending caucuses, which is a helpful role.
For teachers, it is an equally easy choice. You can attend the caucus of your choice. You are acting as an adult, not as a teacher; and in your role as a teacher you do not have the responsibility to direct other adults in the implementation of policy.
For school board members, it is a bit more complex of a decision. You are an elected official to a non-partisan office. You need to judge the politics of your locality. If partisan politics in your area is a low key affair and you can attend a caucus primarily as a concerned adult about education, then attend. If however, your locality is highly partisan, and your attendance would be seen as making your school board position a partisan position, then I would recommend you take a pass as administrators need to do. You can attend, but understand that others may attach a meaning to that. You know your locality and your relationship to your district the best.
So, if you’re comfortable with attendance, please find a way to a attend the precinct caucus of the political party with which you are in general agreement with its principles. Take the MREA platform with you. To keep it simple, be sure to introduce a resolution that urges the Minnesota Legislature and Governor to “Find additional state revenue and establish a schedule to repay the $2.1 billion loan and return to the 90/10 payment schedule.” (MREA 2012 Platform)
Who can attend a caucus?
Precinct caucuses are open to the public and participation is encouraged by the political parties. In order to vote, offer resolutions or become a delegate at a precinct caucus, attendees must be eligible to vote in the next general election, live in the precinct, and be in general agreement with the principles of the political party.
Links to the precinct caucus locators available for your home address will be the MREA Updates starting with January 23.
Update 12/19/11 -- What a rough week for the GOP… and a look at the 2012 session
Sen. Amy Koch resigned as Senate Majority Leader after being confronted by her colleagues about an inappropriate relationship she’s alleged to have had with a senate staffer. According to the Senate GOP’s operating rules they must elect a new leader within two weeks. Sources indicate they will meet a day or two before New Year’s to hold the election. Former Senate GOP minority leader Dave Senjem (Rochester) has publicly indicated an interest in the position. Sen. Koch played an instrumental role in getting the Senate GOP into the majority for the first time in 38 years. Her decision to resign and not run again leaves the Senate GOP without their key election champion as they head into a very contentious 2012 campaign season with all of their seats up for re-election.
In other news, House Speaker Kurt Zellers announced the schedule for the 2012 session which begins on Tuesday, January 24th. The legislature will take a break from Thursday, February 2 through Tuesday, February 7th so members can fully participate in their precinct caucuses (Tuesday the 7th). They will work through February and March and then take an extended break starting on Friday, April 5th (Good Friday) through Sunday, April 15th. They will adjourn “sine die” on April 30th which is about three weeks earlier than normal. They want members to get back to their newly drawn legislative districts (will be released on February 21) early this year to start work on what promises to be an arduous campaign season.
The 2012 session should run a little smoother this year since there won’t be a major budget fight given the state’s projected balanced budget through the remainder of the biennium. Instead, the battle will be over the scope and size of the bonding bill (GOP says $500 million, Dayton says $750 million) and a host of policy reforms and constitutional amendments. The GOP policy reforms will be their leverage against the Governor’s request for a larger bonding bill. As for the constitutional amendments, the Governor doesn’t have any authority as to whether or not they go on the ballot next November. The GOP majorities have to decide if and what they want on the ballot in addition to the question defining marriage. Other amendments could be 1) requiring photo ID to vote, 2) require a supermajority in the legislature to raise taxes and 3) an anti-union measure known as “right to work.”
MDE Task Forces and Greater MN Reps
The Legislature, Governor, and MDE all establish Task Forces and Working Groups on knotty issues. I expect this trend to continue in the current highly partisan, divided government. Task Forces are a way to influence policy, but only if advocates for your situation are present. Greater Minnesota has not been well represented on these in large part because it is a sacrifice to attend due to travel time and distance.
The Teacher Evaluation Task Force is the exception with eight of the 34 members coming from outside the seven county metropolitan area. Otherwise Greater Minnesota’s representation has been one or two of task forces numbering into the 20’s. Here are the 2011-12 Task Forces and their Greater Minnesota members. Thank you to all and especially those from MREA member districts.
MREA needs persons willing to represent Greater Minnesota on Task Forces and standing committees for agencies. If you are willing, please email Fred Nolan, Executive Director. He will alert you when openings come available. The turnaround time for appointments is usually too short to send out a general call for volunteers.
Tiered Licensure Task Force meeting – 6 December 2011 – MDE: Thanks to Allen Hoffman of Comfrey Public Schools for providing this report for the MREA Update. (Click to read report)
12.5.11 Update -- Public Meetings to Discuss School Districts 2011 Budgets and Proposed 2012 Taxes
These used to be “Truth in Taxation Hearings” and held separately from your School Board Meeting. They are now part of a regular school board meeting in December.
In doing the research for the PowerPoint for these meetings, which I have sent to your superintendent, it is clear that property taxes are trending upwards state-wide for the following reasons:
They are not trending upwards because of the overall price of government as a percentage of personal income which has remained relatively constant over the past 10 years. It has varied 8% up or down from a median of 15.6%. This is down from the percentage in the mid 1990’s, but I have not found those numbers yet. This is a statistic started by former Governor Arne Carlson, a Republican.
The change from a homestead credit to an exclusion has made property tax increases a volatile issue in Greater Minnesota. Where municipalities, school districts and counties used to receive $’s from the state to make up the homestead credit, those dollars now come from other property classifications and higher valued homes. The fact that raw Ag land is maintaining or increasing in value while homes are decreasing in value has accelerated this shift in tax burden. I see this in my own property taxes on a parcel of raw Ag land in the Medford School District that has increased 6.2% in value and an 18.4% increase in total proposed property tax. Most of that increase is at the county level.
In general, I would suggest five themes or mantra’s to keep repeating during these hearings:
Understanding Recent Changes in Homestead Benefits
The web link is http://taxes.state.mn.us/property/Documents/hmve-taxpayers.pdf
11.28.11 Update - Positive Reponse to 2011 Conference
Ninety-six percent of the educators who attended the 2011 MREA Conference “will recommend to my friends/colleagues to attend this conference in 2012.” Specifically, this is what individuals who attended the conference at Cragun’s Resort had to say about the conference:
This content-rich, practitioner-led event takes full advantage of MREA's broad membership with presentations from teachers, administrators, board members, parents, consultants, researchers and students. Despite notable differences, MREA's fall forum is a smaller, more intimate version of the TIES annual conference, a "must do" event for education leaders, technologists, teachers and integrationists.
Paul Brinkman, Executive Director, Northeast Service Cooperative.“Very relevant sessions for our district, met the needs of administrators, school board members and teachers that attended.”
Renae Tostenson, in-coming Superintendent, Lac qui Parle Valley School District“Dynamic guest speakers and presenters.”
Michele Green, teacher, Bemidji Public Schools.
Whether you attended the conference or not, the speaker handouts and information are available on the MREA website.
Very Important - Your Feedback is Needed
If you did NOT attend the 2011 fall conference, you can help MREA have the premier rural education conference in 2012 by responding to this four question survey on what prevented you from attending the MREA conference 2011. Your feedback is critical to MREA creating a conference that will appeal to you. https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/X3CXMCC
Open Enrollment
You probably know the net open enrollment data for your districts, but have you ever wondered where your open enrollment students are coming from and where your resident district students are open enrolling to? A new Excel spreadsheet from House Research allows users to track student movement by district for the 2009-10 school year: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/issinfo/MovementByDistrict10.xlsx
The instructions are pretty easy and the results are of interest.
So What Does a Viking Stadium Have to do With the School Payment Shifts?
This may be one of the interesting questions in the upcoming 2012 legislative session. MREA’s platform calls for the state to, “Find additional state revenue and establish a schedule to repay the $2.1 billion loan and return to the 90/10 payment schedule.” Minnesota Senator Claire Robling and Representative Bob Gunther make the connection in their Op Ed piece “It’s Obvious: Fund Stadiums with Racinos” (Minneapolis Star Tribune, Nov. 21, 2011. A13). The fifth reason they advocate for racinos is, “with the remaining state revenue, we can repay our local school districts the money borrowed from them to balance the budget last July.”
Is this a good idea? Is there a better way to begin paying back the shift? I’m sure MREA will be asked if we have a position on this. These and other questions will come up now that the 2012 is around the corner. Expect an MREA update every other Monday between now and the beginning of the session, January 24, 2012, to keep you up-to-speed.
Instructional Improvement – Data Informed Instructional Decision Making
On September 13, the Regional Educational Laboratory Rural Working Group presented a 90-minute webinar to more than 200 participants across the country. Achievement Data and Instructional Decision Making in Rural Schools and Districts featured Ellen Mandinach, Ph.D., coauthor of the IES Practice Guide Using Student Achievement Data to Support Instructional Decision Making. Among the panelists who provided their personal experience with implementing the guide's recommendations was Gary DePatis, superintendent of Greenview Community Unit School District 200 in Illinois. REL Northeast & Islands hosted the webinar, which is archived on their website. EdWeek contributor Diette Courrege covered the webinar in her September 14 blog
11.10.11 Update -- Congratulations to MREA Districts’ Voters for Supporting Levy Requests
MREA Districts’ voters supported 84% of all questions asked of them on Tuesday regarding property taxes to support the education of their youth. 100% of the 20 renewals passed as well as 74% of the requests for increases in levy dollars per pupil (17 of 24). As can be seen in the chart and table below, these passage rates are significantly higher than those of Non-MREA School Districts.
State-wide, voters approved 75% of all questions in all Minnesota districts on Tuesday; 97% of renewal questions were approved and 57% of requests for increases in property taxes. 79% of school districts holding elections passed at least one referendum question. This is a good indication that at the local level Minnesota voters are willing to tax themselves to educate the youth of their communities.
Unfortunately, only three increases approved were in districts previously without operating referendums: Pelican Rapids, St. Charles and Waseca. While those districts and their voters deserve huge congratulations, this leaves 35 school districts without an operating levy, or roughly 10% of Minnesota’s school districts. This highlights the inequity of relying on local voter referendums to meet the state’s constitutional responsibility to provide a “general and uniform system of education.”
This inequity is one reason that MREA supports “Funding Education for the Future,” a $700 referendum roll-in for all school districts and allowing local boards to under-levy if they don’t need the full $700 per pupil. See the MREA 2012 Platform for this and other areas of advocacy which puts learners first.
But since this is the system we have, let’s share tips for getting voter approval of referendums. If you have strategies that worked in your district including communications, the use of photos, testimonials, statistics such as the charts MREA provided comparing your district’s total revenue to inflation with and without voter approval of your referendum question(s), voter ID, get out the vote (GOTV), or whatever you feel helped your voters to support the levy request, please send them to MREA, and we will pass them along to members.
Again, congratulations to districts who were successful in telling their story to their voters and having their voters support quality education in their community.
Summary Statistics of Tuesday, Nov 8th Operating Referendum Questions*
All Districts’ Questions |
Pass Tot Number |
Pass Percentage |
Fail Tot Number |
Fail |
All Questions |
104 |
75% |
35 |
25% |
Renewals |
59 |
97% |
2** |
3% |
Increases |
45 |
57% |
33 |
43% |
MREA Districts’ Questions |
|
|
|
|
All Questions |
37 |
84% |
7 |
16% |
Renewals |
20 |
100% |
0 |
0% |
Increases |
17 |
74% |
7 |
26% |
Non-MREA Districts’ Questions |
|
|
|
|
All Questions |
67 |
71% |
28 |
29% |
Renewals |
39 |
94% |
2 |
6% |
Increases |
28 |
49% |
26 |
51% |
*MSBA is source for data on passage and failures of referendum questions.
**Rocori District is the only district who failed a renewal, but they had two renewal questions.
10.19.11 Update -- Congratulations to Minnesota’s Blue Ribbon Elementary Schools! Six of eight honorees are Greater Minnesota Schools and four are in MREA Member Districts. We send congratulations to:
Minnesota’s NCLB Waiver Application is on a fast track to be submitted to the USDOE by November 14. While the waiver will allow the state to set “ambitious but achievable goals in reading/language arts and mathematics” rather than requiring 100% proficiency by 2014, this is not a “get out of jail free” card. the waiver will require:
Since MDE thinks that we have college and career ready standards already and believes the recent legislation on teacher and principal evaluation meets that requirement, it has called together a working group to address the middle bullet—“targeting,” “supporting,” and “rewarding” schools. Jerry Reshetar, Superintendent of Glenville Emmons and Grand Meadow School Districts, and I are serving on this working group. We meet for four Fridays in a row ending November 4.
You can follow the progress of this working group on the MDE front page by clicking on Minnesota’s NCLB Waiver Request found in grey on the left hand side of the page under News Center. There are FAQ’s and other information on that page. Please email me with questions and thoughts after you’ve looked at the materials on the waiver request page, and I will try to bring them forward to the working group.
MDE has established an 18 member Task Force on Tiered Licensure. Alan Hoffman, Superintendent of Comfrey, is the only member not from the seven county metropolitan area. In a previous life Alan was the Executive Director of the Board of Teaching, and previous to that served on the Board of Teaching, so this is familiar territory for Alan. He will be an excellent and knowledgeable advocate for the needs of Greater Minnesota.
I sent him an email congratulating him on his appointment and noting he was the only non-metro member. He replied in part, “I was telling my wife about this, noticing that I am the only one outside the 7 county metro region. You probably understand that dichotomy much better than I do in your position.”
Yes, I do and why we need a strong MREA to advocate not just at the legislature but also in the various task forces and state committees that create rules and positions for MDE. Thank you to all who serve, and I am always looking for members who want to serve. Let me know because often I have a VERY short window to find a representative.
10.12.11 Update -- Sixth Grade Math and the Need for Voter Approval of Local Referendums
Numbers can be slippery, and one should be very careful when the education of our Minnesota children is at stake. When I was a sixth grade teacher, two types of problems would trip up my students: rate and distance, and of course fractions, decimals and percents. As I travel around the state and read local press reports, it is clear that these same math problems are bedeviling some of our legislators as they attempt to explain the work they did for schools and school children in the last legislative session. And they did some good work; there is no doubt about that.
Let’s consider rate and distance. If you were to get on I-90 at 55 miles per hour in Fairmont, MN and head west, and increased your speed to 65 and drove for an hour, and then got impatient and increased your speed to 75 miles for an hour, how much faster are you going and how much farther along are you than if you kept the speed at 55? Most of my students would say you’re going 20 miles an hour faster. That’s the easy part, but many would miss that you are 30 miles further down the road. You went 10 miles further in the first hour, and 20 miles further in the second hour, because you were already going 10 miles further at 65. What math books never asked was, “Have we gotten there yet?” “Have we reached our destination?”
When explaining the increases in funding, some GOP legislators are getting the total distance traveled portion of the rate and distance problem right, and getting tripped up on the speed. When they compare the predicted funding for the 2011-12 school year (FY ’12) with 2010-2011 (FY ’11) and compare the 2012-13 school year (FY ’13) with 2010-11 (FY ’11), they have the correct numbers (if you include revenue for which some districts are eligible but don’t access, and include all voter approved referendums including those approved in 2010). They know the total distance traveled in terms of state funding of education. For example, as stated in the Fairmont Sentinel for Fairmont Area Schools those numbers are $121 per pupil and $276 per pupil.*
So, how much of an increase is that in educational funding? (How much faster are we going?) To continue to use Fairmont Area Schools as the example, the increase in FY ’12 of $121 is a modest 1.4% when compared to the total funding per pupil the previous year (FY ’11). And the increase in FY ’13 is $155 ($276-$121) or 1.8% over the previous year (FY ’12), because we are already going $121 per pupil faster. We are investing more in the education of our children, even when facing a budget deficit, but we are not going 85 miles an hour down I-90. We are going 3.2% faster. To put this in perspective, if we started on I-90 at 55, our top speed now is 57 miles per hour two hours later.
But rate and distance problems were a piece of cake for my sixth graders compared to fractions, decimals and percentages. One of the hard concepts for my students was that both the numerator (top number) and denominator (bottom number) matter when determining the value of a fraction, decimal or percentage.
3/6 = ½ or .5 or 50% and 3/4 = .75 or 75%. If you have three apples in both examples, it is the same number of apples, but if you have a family of six, you’re only going to get ½ an apple and if you are a family of four each person gets ¾ of an apple. Same number of apples, but it will make a big difference in how satisfied or hungry you will be after the snack.
So when some GOP legislators say, “Minnesota is spending more on K-12 education than it ever has and increased spending in this area by 9% over the next two years,”* how many apples is that, and how many are in the family?
True, state and local referendum support for all public schooling is predicted to be the highest it has ever been: $8,164,067,954 this school year (FY ’12) and $8,514,084,284 next school year, (FY ’13) or roughly $16.7 billion. For that we need to give credit to the GOP majority in the MN House and Senate and the DFL Governor Dayton. They agreed in the special session to these dollar amount for education. Let’s leave aside the fact that they are borrowing $2.7 billion from schools to pay for these entitlements and other state funding for another day. Let’s also leave aside the fact that roughly 3/5 of this spending is the extension of current law, not “new formulas” or increased formula amounts.
So percentage-wise how much of a total increase is that? Here is where the story gets slippery, and please don’t let your eyes glaze over and say, “Not more math homework?!” The total increase in predicted investment in education of the next two years (the biennium) is roughly $715 million. Compared to the total spending in the previous two school years (the FY ’10 and FY ’11 biennium) of $15.6 billion, this is a 4.5% increase in predicted spending. This is a good thing for the education of our children.
But if one chose to compare the two year spending increase to last school year’s total spending FY ’11 (one year), you get 8.9% which if rounded makes 9%. I am at a loss why someone would do this. The schools are getting the same number of new apples (no one is arguing that) and have to educate students for two years, not one year, so 4.5% is a more accurate increase statewide. All these numbers come from the MDE Look Up table which is found on the front page of MREA’s web site, www.mnrea.org. You can also find the table in program finance on the MDE web site.
But why do I keep saying “predicted spending?” Because when one examines this Look Up table closely, MDE is predicting state-wide a $108 Million increase in locally approved levy referendums in FY’13 based on the referendum elections being held this November. If you take voter approved referendums out of the equation, the state funded increase drops to 3.8% new total state investment over the biennium compared to the last one. Apples to apples, two years to two years, only state funds included: 57 miles per hour.
So, do locally approved referendums need to be renewed and extended in years and dollar amounts? This is asking the question, “Where are we on our journey to provide quality education for the children of Minnesota?” Consider this fact. In the 2003-04 school year, referendums accounted for 6.7% of total funding for education in the state of Minnesota, and next year (2012-13) they are expected to account for 11.5% of total investment. This means that schools are increasingly relying on voter approved local property taxes to make up what the state has not provided over the same time period. This is a 40% increase in the importance of local levies state-wide for the quality of education for Minnesota’s children.
To see how important the renewal of existing referendums is across Minnesota, see the chart** below to consider what will happen to the children of MREA member district BOLD if the voters do not renew the existing $700 per pupil referendum:
Yes, state spending has increased, and so has inflation—even at a faster rate. As a result, school districts state-wide are relying more and more on local voters to make up the difference. For example, MREA member district Wheaton has to ask their voters for a $547 increase in pupil to just barely beat inflation over the past five years as shown in the chart** below:
And that difference will matter to your community’s children. Each district’s situation is also different due to the complexity of the Minnesota funding formula. The superintendents of all member MREA districts that are asking for voter approval of referendums have received charts comparing their questions to inflation’s impact on their funding. You need to learn your district’s financial situation. You will make a difference, positively or negatively for your kids on Tuesday, Nov. 1st.
* Representative Bob Gunther, Senator Julie Rosen, Fairmont Sentinel, September 20, 2011
** Data Sources: BOLD and Wheaton total revenue per pupil (blue) from MDE Program Finance. Inflation (red): CPI average 2008-2011, CPI projection 2012-2013 from Minnesota Department of Management and Budget. Chart prepared by MREA for member districts BOLD and Wheaton.
9.12.11 Update -- New Homestead Tax Exclusion will result in property tax increases.
I wish I had good news to report. I have been talking at area meetings held so far about the change from the Homestead Credit to an Exclusion, and I got to thinking, where are funds going to come from to replace the state funded credit? So I emailed that question to Tim Strom of MN House research. Here was his response:
The elimination of the Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) is going to be a big deal for school districts and other municipalities this fall as they set their levies for taxes payable in 2012 and try to explain why the rates are going up!
Tim Strom, MN House Research in email to Fred Nolan, Exec Director MREA 9/1/11
The 2011 Special Session eliminated the market value homestead credit (MVHC) and replaced it with an exclusion. Both the former credit and new exclusion apply to homes valued below $413,800. Homes below $76,000 in value received the full credit (now exclusion), and a sliding scale reduces the credit to zero $413,800. The difference between the credit and exclusion is who pays for this targeted property tax relief.
In the old market value homestead credit, the state sent a check to the counties to pay for the credit. The revenue came from state income, sales and other tax revenues. In the new exclusion, the burden will fall to other types of property within the taxing jurisdiction. Therefore the rates will be higher on all property to make up for the absence of state supplied revenue. Depending upon how counties used to account for this credit, and whether they seek “constant revenue,” in 2012, the increase in taxes for all classifications could be as high as 8.6%.
Tim Strom went on to write, “Steve Hinze of our office has prepared an excellent document that describes the conversion of the MVHC and includes some material about the effect of the change on local governments, which you may find helpful in trying to explain this to people:” http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/issinfo/hmvexclusion.pdf.
I suggest you read the report. The main effect is simple: state revenue is replaced with local property tax revenue on classifications other than homesteads. This will affect all property taxes. The examples work with Estimated Market Value (EMV) and Net Tax Capacity (NTC). The effect on your district’s ANTC based taxes should be similar and adjusted by the sales ratio. However working out the details on the effects for your district’s tax payers will take phone calls to the people working for your city and county who are tracking these changes.
There is some good news for districts renewing operating referendums. The 2011 bill specifically states that RMV is not affected by the exclusion. So RMV is based on the property's value before the exclusion, and is not affected by the change. Therefore the tax effect of a renewal will be affected by your enrollment changes, your district’s total RMV value, and specific property owners’ value, not the elimination of the Homestead Credit.
Thank you to Tim Strom and Steve Hinze for this excellent work. If you have questions, please send them to fred@e-f-services.com and they will send them on. That way the answers can be relayed to all MREA members.
If you are going for a referendum renewal, I urge you to be really clear to your voters that “this vote to renew the referendum will not increase your taxes.” Do not say that their taxes will remain the same. Not only will this change from homestead credit to exclusion affect property taxes, but your county and city’s reaction to the reductions in LGA will also. You know you need to retain your credibility as the sand shifts under your feet.
For those who like the inside baseball politics, House Tax Chair Greg Davids and Gov Dayton have both blamed the other for this change. See http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/128641813.html to read the details.
9.6.11 Update -- Special Session Funding Increases, How They are Being Spun, and Actions for You to Consider
To be sure, MREA wants to give credit where credit is due. The GOP majorities in the House and Senate along with DFL Governor Dayton truly held school funding harmless despite a $5 billion budget deficit. The legislature put $50/pupil on the formula to help schools with borrowing costs. The special education growth factor (increase of 4.6%) was in jeopardy, but we successfully fought to keep it in place.
Last, but certainly not least, is the addition of “small schools revenue” to the basic formula allowance. Districts with fewer than 1,000 AMCPUs will benefit and the optimal funding is for districts with 500 students who will receive about $130,000 starting in fiscal year 2013. The revenue is a forecasted part of the basic allowance so it will not be prorated, but it is subject to the 60/40 shift.
In the 60/40 shift, the state of Minnesota owes school districts $2.7 Billion (with a B). Schools are the bankers for the state of Minnesota to provide services in all regions and types of service. This “kicks the can” down the road as both parties have strongly held beliefs on tax policy.
Notwithstanding this, an issue has arisen in how these formula increases are described and what the implications are.
The $50 and the “Small Schools Revenue” are described in statute as $50 per AMCPU. AMCPU is the three year averaging of weighted students that smoothes out the effects of enrollment changes (whether declining or increasing) to assist districts, especially smaller ones, in budget planning.
However, MDE reports the increases in funding in ADM’s, the student numbers districts project for 2011-12 and 2012-13.
This will increase the reported revenue increases in several ways:
In addition to the ways the “look up table” from MDE appears to increase the funding to schools, the Republican Legislators are adding the following spin by using tables in which:
This look up table and the PDF’s can be found on the MREA website. The PDF’s are by district number. To get the details for your school district, ask your superintendent how to use the look up table or call me @ 320-333-8890. This new revenue and the added spin, means board members, administrators and teacher leaders should consider taking several actions:
Nothing is ever easy, but remember, this is a better outcome for schools and educating kids than we ever expected nine months ago. Use your funds wisely as you put learners first.
The Legislature and Governor Dayton finally reached a budget agreement that ended the nation’s longest state government shutdown. While it was frustrating to wait this long for budget and policy news the final E-12 budget bill has some great “wins” for rural schools.
For several years MREA has been pushing for mandate relief and this year we got it! Included in the new E-12 bill are permanent repeals of:
We tried for a permanent repeal of the 2% staff development set aside, and we were able to secure a two-year extension on the current moratorium. The new E-12 bill also allows a community with fewer than 6,000 residents (old law was 2,000) to use a principal or superintendent to serve as the community education director instead of having a license community education director serving in that position. The state will now allow schools to get fund transfers approved by the MDE instead of going through the legislative process if the fund transfer has no financial impact on the state.
School finance was held harmless in the process despite a $5 billion budget deficit. Many will criticize the 60/40 shift as “kicking the can down the road” and they’re right. The final budget deal does a lot of that, but at least the legislature put $50/pupil on the formula to help schools with borrowing costs. The special education growth factor (increase of 4.6%) was in jeopardy, but we successfully fought to keep it in place.
Last, but certainly not least is the addition of “small schools revenue” to the basic formula allowance. Districts with fewer than 1,000 AMCPUs will benefit and the optimal funding is for districts with 500 students who will receive about $130,000 starting in fiscal year 2013. The revenue is a forecasted part of the basic allowance so it will not be prorated, and it is subject to the 60/40 shift.
The new E-12 bill created future work for us as well. An integration funding task force will convene and make recommendations for re-purposing integration revenue. Integration revenue will sunset in its current form in two years under the new bill and a new plan needs to be put in its place.
Teacher and principal evaluations are now required and will have to meet some state guidelines. MREA fought this year to make sure local boards and bargaining units would be able to develop their own plans and the final bill allows this. A district and EA may develop a plan locally or they can opt into a plan developed by the MDE with stakeholders from public education and the business community.
Many assumed at the start of this session that mandate relief would be a “slam dunk” with newly elected republican majorities in the legislature. Not so. These were hard fought battles and interest groups from all corners of the state fought back. In the end our arguments, legislative strategy and a sustained grassroots effort got the job done!
Thanks to all who belong to MREA and made numerous legislative contacts – at home and at the Capitol – this session. To those in greater Minnesota who don’t belong to MREA – please join our ranks as we strive to build on our momentum from this session.
5.25.11 Update: Dayton vetoes GOP budget plan
Amidst protestors chanting “tax the rich”, the GOP legislature closed the 2011 regular session at midnight Monday. After a raucous week of protests over the marriage constitutional amendment, negotiations between the GOP majority and Governor Dayton fell flat. Both sides continue to claim they have compromised and it’s up to the other party to acquiesce to their position. The GOP will campaign for the next several weeks that their $34 billion spending level is sufficient and there’s no need for new revenue. Governor Dayton will explain what the local impact is of the GOP “all cuts” budget plan and make the case for new revenue. His particular choice for new revenue is taxing the wealthiest 2% of Minnesotans.
There is no clear sign about when Governor Dayton will call the legislature back into special session. Most speculate that he won’t call them in until he and the GOP leadership have a deal. The two sides remain far apart, with the GOP wanting to cut $3.6 billion and the Governor wanting $1.8 billion in revenue and $1.8 billion in cuts. A school shift of $1.4 billion is all but certain and could grow as the two parties stretch to close their differences on taxes and spending.
In his veto letter to the legislature, Dayton explained that he is concerned about the cuts to special education funding and the elimination of integration funding. He also expressed concern about the policy items contained in the bill, including vouchers, limits on collective bargaining, a school grading system, prohibitions on adopting the common core standards and a new teacher evaluation system. He described these proposals as punitive to teachers and lacking any research to support their efficacy.
HF 1381: Education Policy
At the last minute, the legislature produced an education policy bill and had enough time to pass it off the House and Senate floor. The bill will be presented to Governor Dayton in the next day or so, and speculation is that it, too, will face a veto. The bill contains a lot of mundane policy provisions and a few that are of interest to schools districts. The teacher’s union, in particular, expressed concerns about a few provisions, and the Department of Education didn’t seem very interested in this bill. Here’s a snap shot of what it contains:
5.20.11 Update -- GOP sends budget plan to Governor Dayton
As of last night, the House and Senate passed all of the individual budget bills that make up their “all cuts” budget plan. The budget bills were delivered to the Governor today. Governor Dayton has three days to review the bills and then either sign them into law or veto them and return them to the legislature. It is clear at this point that he will veto the entire package of bills and then the clock will run out on the regular session at midnight Monday night.
In the meantime, the House and Senate are continuing their work on individual policy bills. There may still be an education policy bill, but talks between the legislature and the department appear to be moving slow and behind the scenes without public input.
June 30th is the deadline for getting a budget in place; otherwise some functions of government will shut down. It’s unlikely that Governor Dayton will call the legislature back right away. More likely he’ll call them back closer to the June 30th deadline in hopes of reaching a compromise on the budget before a shutdown occurs.
5.16.11 Update -- Governor Dayton proposes a 50-50 split for budget deal
With seven days remaining in the 2011 regular session Governor Dayton offered the legislature an even split on solving the $5 billion budget deficit. For starters, both sides agree on continuing the K-12 payment shift at 70/30 for another two years which “saves” the state $1.4 billion. Dayton proposes taxing the top 2% income earners at 10.95% (gross family income above $300,000; gross single income above $180,000) which would raise $1.8 billion or half of the remaining $3.6 billion deficit. He would then accept $1.8 billion in cuts to be negotiated with the legislature.
GOP legislative leadership immediately rejected the offer saying they don’t have the votes to raise taxes of any kind. At this time they continue pushing forward with their all-cuts budget bills. As of Monday night they have wrapped up work on all of the major spending bills. The Governor and Legislature will continue negotiating this week, but a global budget deal looks doubtful at this time. Most likely the GOP legislature will put their budget bills on Dayton’s desk over the weekend and he will have two weeks to review them and either sign or veto the bills.
Nothing has changed on the E-12 front since last week’s GOP compromise. MREA sent out a summary of the bill last week, but here’s a link to the actual conference report:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/getbill.php?number=hf0934&type=ccr&session=ls87
Teacher Effectiveness & Evaluations
One of the marquee policy initiatives for the GOP majority this session is a proposal backed by the state Chamber of Commerce. The proposal would require annual evaluations of all teachers and principals and development of a data system that would give teachers an effectiveness rating. The Chamber and other organizations such as MinnCAN (MN Campaign for Achievement Now) are pushing the proposal because they want to end what they call “quality blind layoffs.”
The proposal is included in the GOP E-12 conference report. The administration through MN Management & Budget worked with school officials to develop a Local Impact Note to identify the costs associated with the proposals. District officials should take a look their analysis. (MMB LIN for Evaluations)
Other Policy Bills of Interest
SF 170 has been agreed to by the House and Senate. The bill would require teacher candidates as of 2014 to pass the basic skills test before entering teacher prep programs. The bill also requires teacher prep grads to pass the basic skills test before they get their license.
HF 392 was passed off the House floor today. It awaits action on the Senate floor. The bill requires that school buses manufactured after January 1, 2012, for use in Minnesota include a school bus crossing arm.
5.11.11 Update -- House and Senate GOP Agree on E-12 Plan:
With just under two weeks until the end of the regular session, House and Senate GOP leaders came to an agreement on a plan for E-12 funding. Governor Dayton has requested the GOP legislature to come to a unified position on each budget area before he begins negotiating with them. The GOP E-12 plan is likely to be vetoed by Dayton should they put it on his desk in its current form. However, the plan gives the two parties negotiating positions as we head into the last week of session.
What does the plan include?
A total state aid target for the next two years that is about $27 million less than what the House and Senate originally brought to conference committee. We aren’t sure why the reduction occurred, but can only speculate that the funds will be used to help with other budget area targets.
The plan calls for a slight increase in the basic formula of $20/pupil in FY 12 and $21/pupil in FY 13. This is less than the GOP bills originally called for, but they decided to put some funds back into special education. Instead of eliminating the 4.6% growth factor in special education the GOP decided to keep a 2% growth factor for special education in the next two years and a reinstatement of the 4.6% growth level in subsequent years.
The GOP included their proposal to de-link compensatory, sparsity and transportation sparsity from future increases in the basic allowance. This does not mean these programs are being cut, but it does mean that future increases to the programs will be separate decisions from simply putting dollars on the formula which currently drive increases to these programs.
The 70/30 payment shift is included and they do propose to repeal MS 127A.46 which allows the state to short term borrow from schools based on their year-end fund balances levels in order to help with state cash flow problems.
Mandate Relief: The GOP plan includes a repeal of the January 15th deadline and penalty, the safe schools support staff maintenance of effort and the 2% staff development set aside. The plan also relieves communities with fewer than 7,500 residents from having a community education director. Districts would be allowed to seek fund transfers from the commissioner of education as long as the fund transfers don’t cost the state any money.
Integration aid is phased out, and in its place are “innovation funding” and “literacy funding.” We aren’t sure exactly how these dollars will go to schools, but some of it may be in the form of grants.
The voucher plan for low income students in Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth to enroll in non-public schools is included in the plan. Provisions to require participating non-public schools to meet anti-discrimination, bullying, disability and other requirements were taken out of the voucher plan. If this was controversial with the Governor before the change it is certainly a major controversy now without these measures.
Teacher evaluations will be required under the GOP plan. Portions of the evaluations will be developed locally and a statewide task force of interested parties will provide guidance. The evaluations will be used to rate teachers, and districts will be allowed to change dismissal practices and seniority rules based on individual teacher evaluation ratings. This is highly controversial with the teacher’s union and will be cumbersome for districts to implement.
School report card grading systems are back under this plan. The department is required to develop criteria to grade schools on an “A-F” scale which will be made public.
The plan also includes a provision by which schools boards can make a “Qualified Economic Offer” to bargaining units which would force binding arbitration. The binding arbitration package cannot put a district out of structural balance. Furthermore, teachers will be classified as “essential” employees under the plan meaning they cannot strike over economic issues.
The plan also freezes the ability of the Department of Education to issue rules regarding special education unless they have specific statutory authority from the legislature to do so.
Streamlining the third-party billing process for special needs children eligible for Medicaid is included.
A fix for the Lancaster and Northland schools sparsity aid is included.
Operating Capital funds may be used to lease school vehicles under the plan.
The E-12 conference committee approved these provisions late last night and instructed staff to write all of this up in bill language. We know conceptually what they agreed to, but we don’t have the actual bill language yet. It will be a day or two before we see it and are able to answer specific questions about these provisions.
Management of the School Trust Lands
There has been an effort to gain control of the management of the school trust lands so that more of the revenue would go to school districts. We are one step closer to making that happen. Below is a press release from Representative Denise Dittrich who has been championing this effort on schools behalf.
May 10, 2011
DITTRICH’S PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND ADVISORY COMMITTEE BILL PASSES HOUSE
(ST. PAUL) – State Representative Denise Dittrich’s (47A-Champlin) bill changing the composition of the Permanent School Fund Advisory Committee passed the Minnesota House of Representatives today on a strong bipartisan vote. Rep. Dittrich is the immediate past chair of the committee.
When the legislative majority switched in 2010, there was no defined role for a member of the minority party. “School Trust Lands and the Permanent School Trust Fund need committed and knowledgeable advocates,” explained Rep. Dittrich. “This bill corrects an oversight and allows trustees to do the important work of maximizing the value of School Trust Lands.”
The state of Minnesota currently owns more than 2.5 million acres of School Trust Lands. An additional one million acres of mineral rights land remains today. These resources are managed by the DNR and the Permanent School Trust Fund receives the revenue from these resources. The Minnesota Legislature established the Permanent School Fund Advisory Committee (PSFAC) to review DNR land management policies, advise the DNR on the management of trust land, and recommend necessary changes in statute, policy, and implementation in order to insure provident utilization of the permanent school fund lands.
“I look forward to continuing my oversight work on this important funding stream for our state’s children,” stated Dittrich. “I pledge to hold the DNR and other agencies accountable for responsible and appropriate management of this amazing resource and to act in good faith as trustees of these public lands.”
In 2008, Dittrich’s legislation enhancing oversight of the Permanent School Trust Fund contributed to an additional $28 in permanent funding for every student in Minnesota. “As our schools have seen the past few years, strong oversight and responsible management of these resources will ensure our students receive every possible dollar they are due,” said Dittrich. “This is a statewide issue that benefits all public school students and schools. At a time when public dollars are limited this education revenue is needed.”
5.2.11 Update -- Budget Negotiations Moving Slowly
There have been reports of cordial meetings between DFL Governor Mark Dayton and GOP leaders of the House and Senate about how to proceed on negotiating their way to solving the state’s projected $5 billion deficit. With three weeks remaining before the state’s constitution dictates the end of the session they are still miles apart from each other. The Tea Party members of the GOP have argued that they have already compromised on the budget because the state spent $32 billion last biennium and their proposal is to spend $34 billion for the next biennium, an increase of $2 billion. The Governor was quoted last week as saying he didn’t get here, “by blinking.” In other words, he’s serious about his tax increases and desire to spend the $37 billion estimated in the February Forecast for the next two years.
There are obvious differences between the Governor’s “all tax” and the GOP’s “all cuts” approach to solving the deficit, but the administration has criticized the legislature’s budget balancing approach as fundamentally flawed because it includes assumptions for budget savings they argue will never materialize. Most of these assumptions fall in the Health & Human Services budget domain where the GOP thinks they will get the federal government to waive all of its requirements for the Medicaid program. They book hundreds of millions of dollars in savings by assuming a “global waiver” from MA, but Dayton says there is no way he would support this and no way the feds would allow it. This fight over the use, or lack thereof, of properly formulated fiscal notes from the administration is a major sticking point in getting the two sides to even agree on the numbers to start the negotiations.
Dayton wants the GOP majorities in the House and Senate to reach a unified position on each of their budget bills before he begins serious negotiations with them. He wants this done by Thursday. So far GOP leaders have been reluctant to do so, and their budget conference committees haven’t done any real work up to now. The conference committees have met a few times, but have simply talked through the various contrasting provisions in their bills.
Constitutional Amendments
The usual social issues such as gay marriage and abortion are popping up at the Capitol in the form of amendments and proposals to amend the constitution. Aside from these are constitutional questions relating to how the state can raise taxes.
Today, at noon, the House Tax committee will review a proposal that requires 3/5th of both bodies of the legislature to approve an increase in state taxes or any changes to the property tax system that would result in a net levy increase. Ironically, the legislature through simple majority can put this question on the ballot in 2012. If adopted it would make even changing the smallest of ANTC levies (operating capital, health and safety, safe schools, OPEB, etc.) very difficult.
If one thinks it’s too easy to raise taxes in St. Paul they only need to look at the last decade. The only new state tax revenue was raised by voters through the Legacy constitutional amendment. The other major revenue came from the “health impact fee” on tobacco products (needed to close the July 2005 special session). Agency fees have gone up significantly over this time and, most notably, property taxes have become the safety valve for local governments to keep up with the costs of state and federally mandated services.
Education Policy
Numerous proposals relating to education policy are floating around the Capitol these days. Some are tied up in the E-12 budget conference committee, some are traveling on their own and others may get wrapped up in an omnibus education policy bill. Few, if any, of these proposals have been requested by traditional public school representatives. Proposals relating to school concussion policies, recreational property usage liability, innovation districts and more are in the mix. We’ll keep you posted as these continue to take shape.
Third Annual Hormel Foundation Gifted & Talented Education Symposium June 12 -16, 2011
Registration for the third annual Hormel Foundation Gifted and Talented Education Symposium is still open. https://www.austin.k12.mn.us/educationalservices/GTsymposium/default.aspx
The symposium provides an opportunity for educators, counselors, administrators and parents to gain greater understanding of the unique needs of gifted and high potential learners. A generous grant from the Hormel Foundation and collaboration between the Minnesota Department of Education and Austin Public Schools makes possible an intensive educational experience for educators through the Midwest. Invited speakers include many of the field’s finest regionally, nationally and internationally known presenters, focusing on foundational knowledge, creativity, curriculum strategies, and social/emotional needs.
The registration fee is $175 and includes: daily keynote presentations and sessions, all conference materials, a tote bag, continental breakfast each day, lunch Monday through Wednesday, break refreshments, Monday evening reception at the SPAM Museum and a banquet at the Hormel Historic Home on Wednesday evening.
A one-day session for Administrators, School Board members and Counselors will be held on Monday, June 13, from 8:30 to 3:45 PM. Dr. Peter Demerath, University of Minnesota will present: The Perils of Hypercredentialing in American Schools: Preserving Learning in a Competitive World. Additional topics will be presented by Dr. Diane Heacox, St. Catherine University; Chrystyna Mursky, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction and Wendy Behrens, Minnesota Department of Education. Registration cost is $55.00 and pre-registration is required.
A Pre-Conference Session is offered on Sunday, June 12, from 1:00 - 4:00 PM at the Holiday Inn. Cost is $40.00. Dr. Terry Neu will present: Pink is for Girls while Blue is for Boys: How Gender Influences our High Ability Learners.
For general information, contact Denise Farnsworth, Austin Public Schools, denise.farnsworth@austin.k12.mn.us
For program information, contact Wendy Behrens, Gifted & Talented Education Specialist, Minnesota Department of Education, wendy.behrens@state.mn.us
At this point, the GOP majorities have ushered their budget proposals into conference committees, and they have begun the basic work of comparing the House and Senate bills. No major action has taken place to date in these conference committees. The E-12 conference committee members are all members of the GOP as no DFLers voted for the E-12 bills. The members are:
Senators Gen Olson (GOP Minnetrista), Carla Nelson (GOP Rochester), Dave Thompson (GOP Lakeville), Pam Wolf (GOP Spring Lake Park), Benjamin Kruse (GOP Brooklyn Park)
Representatives Pat Garofalo (GOP Farmington), Sondra Erickson (GOP Princeton), Tim Kelly (GOP Red Wing), Connie Doepke (GOP Orono), Dan Fabian (GOP Roseau)
Governor Dayton and his commissioners haven’t engaged in the conference committee process yet. Instead, his Finance and Revenue commissioners sent a strong message to legislative leaders that their entire budget packages contain faulty assumptions about savings and are off by more than $1 billion. The memo from the administration says they won’t engage in negotiations until they come up with realistic plans, specifically in the Health & Human Services bill and the State Government Finance bill. As for the E-12 bill, Commissioner Brenda Cassellius testified that the Governor has major concerns with the Legislature’s decision to end integration aid as we know it and shift special education dollars to the basic formula.
Omnibus Education Policy Bill?
With passage of the major budget bills, the Legislature has returned to some policy committee work including several new proposals in education. The education committees reviewed several bills this week that may or may not get rolled into an omnibus education policy bill. Some of the proposals could travel on their own.
HF 905/SF 612: Concussion Policy; Athletic trainers and medical professionals want coaches to take a one hour training each year in understanding the signs and symptoms of concussions. The legislation would establish policy for when kids suspected of having a concussion can re-enter athletic competitions.
HF 1342/SF 1068: School District Liability; The Heart Association and Cancer Society want to encourage more physical activity among youth. They are pushing legislation that would clarify when and how much liability schools have when they open their facilities and property up to members of the public for general use.
HF 755/SF 946: School District Joint Policy and Innovation Delivery; Superintendents are pushing legislation that would allow groups of districts to apply to the MDE Commissioner to receive waivers from traditional education system mandates and, instead, operate under the rules of charter schools.
Other education related policy bills will move in the next two weeks as the policy deadlines approach. Committees have until May 6th to clear policy bills from their committees and keep them alive for the remainder of session.
4.5.11 Update -- MREA Omnibus Education Bill Comparison – Teacher Evaluations
Sam Walseth has done an excellent job of comparing the Senate and House omnibus bills as they relate to teacher evaluations. These bills go into conference committee later this week. We hope this will help you understand the debates that are taking place about this important topic.
Here are descriptions of the House and Senate Omnibus Education bills teacher evaluation proposals. The Governor hasn’t weighed in on this yet. Rep. Brynaert has a version as well (HF 1173), but it isn’t moving. The House version is very lengthy and has a lot of moving parts. The Senate is simpler yet just as controversial among educators.
It’s hard to summarize the proposals in a few short notes. The evaluation proposals are actually tied in with many moving parts and include ‘pay for performance’ and changes to contracts.
HOUSE POSITION – HF 945; Rep. Brandon Peterson; included in HF 934 omnibus E-12 bill:
Evaluation structure
Establishes a teacher evaluation structure to provide information about teacher effectiveness for teachers, school districts, and charter schools to use in developing and improving teacher performance and student learning. Lists the three parts of the structure: a teacher appraisal framework that identifies the performance measures for determining teacher effectiveness; a mechanism for translating the performance data into a five-part teacher effectiveness rating scale; and a four-tier status designation that identifies teachers as standard, advanced, distinguished, or exemplary based on a teacher's effectiveness rating over time.
Teacher appraisal framework
(a) Directs school districts and charter schools to create and implement a teacher appraisal framework that translates performance measures and scores into five effectiveness rating scores where 5 is the highest rating. Directs the education department, in collaboration with the board of teaching, to make available appraisal frameworks and other evidence-based materials to assist schools and districts in implementing an appraisal framework.
(b) Makes statewide assessment results the basis for 50 percent of a teacher's total appraisal if such results are available.
(c) If statewide assessment results are unavailable, makes district-wide assessment results of state and local standards the basis for 40 percent of a teacher's appraisal and makes teacher-developed assessments the basis for another 10 percent of a teacher's total appraisal.
(d) If district-wide assessment results are unavailable, makes teacher-developed and administrator-approved assessments of state and local standards the basis for 50 percent of a teacher's total appraisal. Requires school administrators to meet at least annually with teachers to review, modify, and approve local course and grade-level expectations for student achievement and growth.
(e) Directs a charter school board of directors or school board to consult with teachers in identifying the performance measures used as a basis for the other 50 percent of a teacher's total appraisal. Requires the appraisal to include data from parent surveys and at least two annual evaluations performed by a trained school administrator. Suggests other possible performance measures.
Teacher performance effectiveness ratings
(a) Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, requires districts and charter schools to use a five-point scale to indicate a teacher's performance effectiveness and determine a teacher's effectiveness designation for each teacher who teaches a subject for which statewide assessment results exist.
(1) Rates as highly effective a teacher whose students achieve one and one-half years of academic growth on statewide assessments and who receives a 5 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(2) Rates as effective a teacher whose students achieve at least one year of academic growth on statewide assessments and who receives a 4 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(3) Rates as average a teacher whose students achieve at least .9 years of academic growth on statewide assessments and who receives a 3 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(4) Rates as needs improvement a teacher whose students achieve between .5 and .9 years of academic growth on statewide assessments and who receives a 2 or lower performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(5) Rates as ineffective a teacher whose students achieve less than one-half years of academic growth on statewide assessments and who receives a 1 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework. Declares that a teacher who does not meet both the growth and performance rating requirements in any clause (1) to clause (4) receives the next lower effectiveness rating.
(b) Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, requires districts and charter schools to use a five-point scale to indicate a teacher's performance effectiveness and determine a teacher's effectiveness designation for each teacher who teaches a subject for which no statewide assessment results exist.
(1) Rates as highly effective a teacher who receives a 5 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(2) Rates as effective a teacher who receives a 4 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(3) Rates as average a teacher who receives a 3 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(4) Rates as needs improvement a teacher who receives a 2 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
(5) Rates as ineffective a teacher who receives a 1 performance rating on the district or charter school appraisal framework.
Teacher status designation
(a) Beginning no later than the 2012-2013 school year, directs districts and charter schools to establish a four-tier status designation for identifying teachers' effectiveness using measures of teacher performance and student learning as they relate to meeting state and local education standards.
(b) Gives a standard designation to a probationary teacher who, during the three-year probationary period, receives at least one average, effective or highly effective rating from the employing district or charter school and meets professional development requirements.
(c) Gives an advanced designation to a licensed teacher who receives an average, effective or highly effective rating in four out of each five-year employment period and meets professional development requirements.
(d) Gives a distinguished rating to a teacher who receives a highly effective rating in three years out of a five-year employment period and meets professional development requirements.
(e) Gives an exemplary rating to a teacher who receives a highly effective rating in seven years during two consecutive five-year employment periods and meets professional development requirements.
(f) Allows a teacher with a distinguished or exemplary rating to retain that designation during the remainder of the five-year period in which the teacher received the designation.
(g) Declares that a teacher who does not meet the requirements for a particular status designation under paragraph (c), (d), or (e) receives the next lower status designation and a teacher who does not meet the requirements for a standard designation has no status designation.
Data gathering and analysis
Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, directs the education department, in consultation with the board of teaching, to assist districts and charter schools in collecting and aggregating student data needed to implement this section. Allows the department and a district or charter school to enter into a data sharing agreement where needed. Declares that any data on individual students or teachers that are used to generate summary data under this section are nonpublic data.
Reports
(a) Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, directs districts and charter schools to annually report by August 31 information about their teachers' performance effectiveness ratings and status designations, their teachers' professional preparation program, their appraisal framework, and their graduation rate.
(b) Beginning February 15, 2014, directs the education department to submit a report annually to the legislature analyzing and evaluating summary data reported under this subdivision to determine the effectiveness of teacher appraisal systems in improving teaching and learning.
(c) Beginning in 2014, directs the department annually by June 30 to submit summary data on teachers' effectiveness to the Board of Teaching and the Minnesota teacher preparation program or institution responsible for preparing the teachers.
SENATE POSITION – SF 1030; omnibus E-12 bill:
Salary Increases Based on Student Achievement
Requires at least 50 percent of a teacher’s salary increase to be based on the teacher’s performance using student achievement gains. The teacher's evaluation must only include student data for students who received instruction from that teacher for at least 100 days.
Effective Date: Makes the section effective for contracts covering the two-year term beginning on July 1, 2013 and later.
Qualified Economic Offer
Prohibits teachers from striking for any issue relating to total compensation if the school board offers the teachers a biennial contract that includes a percentage increase at least equal to the district’s biennial percent increase in basic revenue. Teachers may strike for noneconomic issues or submit them to interest arbitration. Provides for a plan if agreement isn’t met by January 15 of the even-numbered year.
Effective Date: Makes the section effective for contracts ratified beginning July 1, 2011.
Termination of Contract after Probationary Period
(a) provides for teacher tenure with five-year renewable contracts. Changes the date that the school board must vote to terminate a teacher’s contract from April 1 to July 1.
(b) clarifies that a hearing request by a teacher whose contract may be terminated by the board must be granted within ten calendar days including notice of the date for the hearing. Removes the option for arbitration for a teacher termination under subdivision 9, termination effective at the end of the school year. A school board is permitted to suspend a teacher with pay pending the conclusion of a hearing or arbitration.
Teacher Employment
Provides for teacher tenure with five-year renewable contracts. A school board’s decision to continue or terminate a teacher’s employment must be based on standards of professional practice, student learning, and successful teacher evaluations and other locally selected criteria.
Grounds for Termination
Clarifies that a continuing contract teacher whose contract may be terminated effective at the end of the school year must receive a written plan to assist them in correcting the items of complaint and have a period no longer than 6 months to remedy those items.
4.1.11 Update -- House E-12 bill passes with minimum number of votes needed: 68-59
The House debated their omnibus E-12 bill for six hours Tuesday night, and they went until almost 3am. The E-12 bill is one of the most controversial education proposals to come to the House floor in a long time. The discussion on vouchers for cities of the first class was over two hours and attempts to remove it from the bill or to make it a statewide proposal failed.
Here’s a recap of the issues debated on the E-12 bill on the floor and their results. The votes on the amendments were along party lines:
DFLers expressed their concerns about the bill in speeches before the final vote. Those concerns include shifting special education revenue and integration aid to the basic formula. They argue the proposal will force local property taxes to increase in addition to their concerns about the overall policy direction of the bill.
Governor’s letter on House E-12 bill
Senate bill passed on party line vote: 36-25
The Senate passed their omnibus E-12 bill Thursday after five hours of debate. Sen. Gen Olson offered an amendment to clarify that the new literacy funds can be spent to improve literacy at all grade levels, not just programs that focus on third grade literacy. DFLers expressed opposition to paying for the literacy funds by repurposing integration aid from cities of the first class. Sen. Harrington tried to remove the repeal of the integration rule from the bill but wasn’t successful. Sen. Michel was successful in getting the QRIS amended into the bill.
The following additional amendments were offered, but failed:
The following amendments were ruled not germane:
A conference committee will be appointed to resolve the differences between the House and Senate bill sometime next week. The House and Senate still have major omnibus bills to process in each body (House: Jobs bill and HHS bill; Senate: Tax bill and Transportation bill). Wednesday would be the earliest day for conference committee to meet and walk through “side-by-sides.”
Working Group on School Funding
The working group on school funding had its first meeting this week. The group is scheduled to meet through May 25. They are charged with developing recommendations for school finance reform. The group is asked to develop realistic funding options for the MDE to present to the Governor.
Tom Melcher, MDE Director of Program Finance, presented an E-12 Education Funding Overview and presented a preliminary reform proposal. The goals of the proposal include:
The working group assumes that there will be no reductions in K-12, but only increases by small amounts in the near future with a modest influx of funding in the $20 to $200 million range. It is further assumed that there will be no increase in levies or changes that create big losers.
The Preliminary Draft Includes:
3.29.11 Update -- Omnibus E-12 Bills to Clear House and Senate This Week
The House omnibus E-12 bill (HF 934) has cleared its way through the committee process and could possibly come up on the House floor on Tuesday. The Senate omnibus E-12 bill (SF 1030) has to clear the full Senate Finance committee Tuesday afternoon, and then it will likely come up on the Senate floor Wednesday or Thursday. Once both bodies have passed their E-12 bills, a conference committee will begin working out the details.
Commissioner Cassellius testified in both the House and Senate that the current proposals go against much of what the Governor wants to accomplish. Specifically, the reductions and changes to integration aid are a major sore spot for the Governor. The legislature’s decision to eliminate the 4.6% regular special education and 2% excess cost special education program growth factors is also a problem for the Governor. The legislature wants to move forecasted increases in special education funds to pay for increases in the basic formula. They also want to de-link compensatory aid, sparsity aid and transportation sparsity aid from future increases in the formula.
The likelihood of the GOP majorities getting Governor Dayton to sign their final E-12 bill into law is slim. Governor Dayton wants to fund education at forecast level and add $37 million for expansion of all day K programs targeted to low income children. There are also a host of policy reforms in play ranging from new teacher evaluation requirements, vouchers in Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth and collective bargaining issues to work out between many parties.
It appears the legislature, for the most part, is going to send budget bills to the Governor that he will veto. This would occur before they break for Passover/Easter on Tuesday, April 17. When they return on Tuesday, April 26 the next attempt at putting a budget together will begin. But, you never know what’s going to happen, and the legislature may decide to keep these conference committees open until there is a budget deal.
3.21.11 -- Omnibus E-12 Funding & Reform Proposals Rolling Out
Monday is a busy day at the Capitol for education. At 9 am the House K-12 Finance Committee will begin work on their omnibus bill (HF 934). They will continue work on the bill Monday night and Tuesday afternoon before sending it to the House Ways and Means Committee. At 3 pm Monday, the Senate E-12 Committee will do the same. The Senate will work on their bill until Wednesday evening before sending it to their Finance committee. The House and Senate E-12 committees are working with budget targets that provide enough revenue to cover the forecasted amount of revenue for E-12 education. This includes paying for the one-time reduction in state aid that was backfilled by federal ARRA funds during fiscal year 2011.
A few weeks ago, Chairman Garofalo expressed concern that his caucus was struggling with whether or not they would provide enough revenue in the K-12 target to pay for the forecasted amount of funding. Some of his colleagues argued (and still are) that the state can’t afford to make up all of the $500 million reduction. They argue that $200-400 million in cuts to K-12 is a blip and those dollars would do wonders in other budget areas, namely to help with a $400 million cut to higher education. Some argue that, at a minimum, the state should reduce state aid in the amount of the last round of federal Edu-Jobs money that just went to districts. The bottom line is we need to rally around our budget target and thank our legislators for fighting for education’s forecasted revenue.
At this time we have seen the draft House E-12 bill. Integration aid is scaled back, and that revenue is used to pay for other initiatives. The forecast also called for about $285 million in new special education funds, but the House proposal captures those dollars and puts them on the formula. A new general education formula component called “small schools revenue” is created and will weight students in districts with fewer than 1,000 pupil heavier than the basic allowance. We are still working to grasp the entirety of the bill and all of its changes and will continue sending updates as the situation develops. Here is a list of the policy and funding changes that will be amended into HF 934.
3.10.11 Update -- Education Funding Targets and Future School Funding
Early this week, we asked MREA members to share their concerns about funding for this upcoming year. You did that, and we appreciate it very much.
Today, House and Senate leadership released funding targets for this coming biennium, and it is about as good of news as we could hope for in the current fiscal climate – basically flat funding with a continued shift for the next two years. We know that other committees will be making some serious reductions to other portions of the state government budget, but it appears that education will be spared the major cuts we were previously informed about and bracing for. It is our understanding that Chairman Garofalo fought hard to make this happen, and he told several of us today about the knock-down, drag out caucus fight the House GOP had when deciding what to do with education funding. For comparison, the new budget targets include a 15% cut to higher education, a 34% cut to state government employees, a 28% cut to transportation and a 56% cut to jobs and economic development funding.
Thanks again to all of you who made contacts with legislators. You do make a difference!
Committee Work Continues
The education committees are working long hours to hear bills before the budget deadline hits on Friday, March 25th. There have been some long meetings with heated conversations as legislators work through what changes should be made to integration and compensatory funding. We’ll know the specifics of what the education committee chairs want to do with the formula in about a week and a half when they release their omnibus education proposals.
Other hot button issues being discussed in education include binding arbitration and contract deadlines, teacher evaluation and tiered licensure and a voucher proposal for low income students.
3.7.11 Update -- Alternative Licensure Signed into Law
At 9:30am this morning, Governor Dayton will sign SF 40 into law. The legislation creates an alternative pathway for people to achieve a teaching license in Minnesota. The legislation is a top priority for the business community and reform minded legislators, and it received bi-partisan support through the legislative process.
Repeal of the School Support Staff Maintenance of Effort Moves Forward
HF 88 was passed off the House floor last Thursday evening. The bill repeals a recently enacted requirement that school districts maintain the total amount of spending or FTEs counted as school support staff. It’s unclear whether or not the Senate will take up HF 88 as a separate bill. The Senate passed this repeal as part of their salary freeze/mandate relief package contained in SF 56. Early action on these standalone bills was probably meant more as a signal to the public that the new GOP majorities are serious about mandate relief and moving education reforms forward. These issues will likely next appear in the legislature’s omnibus education bills and will be subject for the education conference committee.
Integration and Compensatory Funding Scrutinized
The Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) released a report in 2005 that called into question the mission and effectiveness of Minnesota’s integration rule and governing statute. Since that time, the program has received more and more scrutiny. Last year, the Legislature instructed a task force to put together a report on what a new and improved integration program would look like. The House K-12 Finance Committee, chaired by Rep. Pat Garofalo, dug into the OLA report last week, but the new task force report hasn’t been presented yet. Monday night, the House K-12 Finance Committee will review compensatory funding. Both of these categories of funding, which drive a lot of state aid to the urban core, have been sore spots with many GOP legislators for a long time. Now that they are in charge of the legislature, it’s clear the programs are in for some major changes.
Teacher Evaluations
With adoption of the alternative licensure legislation, the business community and others will begin a push to require schools to conduct teacher evaluations. The proposal will likely appear in Monday’s bill introductions, but we are told there will be four primary components to the bill:
If the 70/30 aid payment shift is continued for another two years, which it will be by the time this session gets through, the deficit figure can be reduced by another $1.4 billion leaving a $3.6 billion problem for the legislature and Governor Dayton to grapple with from now until May 23. Given the forecast improvement, Governor Dayton backed off of his proposal to surcharge high end income taxes by 3%. He still maintains his position that top tier income taxes (above $130,000 for head of household and $150,000 for married filing jointly) should be raised permanently to close the deficit, invest in all day kindergarten and protect low-income health insurance and services to persons with disabilities.
The GOP majorities reacted swiftly to the forecast news and reiterated their position to not raise any new revenue to help with the deficit. Instead they will unveil budget targets in about two weeks that are based on an “all cuts” budget. The legislative finance committees must have their proposals out of committee by March 25th.
K-12 Finance
The MREA legislative committee met with House K-12 Finance chairman Pat Garofalo last week, and he had some troubling news for schools. He said he will likely be given a budget target that technically increases the amount of aid to schools from the state from this biennium to the next, but it will look like a cut from the schools’ perspective. The reason why? The state cut the school formula in the 2009 E-12 bill by $500 million, but that cut was backfilled by federal stimulus/stabilization funds. Technically speaking, they can reduce state aid to schools next biennium by up to $499 million and still give us more than the state did in the current biennium. Talk to your legislators and let them know what a cut of that magnitude means for education programs for your students!
2.21.11 Update -- Legislative education committees continue to review mandate relief proposals. Rep. Sondra Erickson has the latest version (HF 511) which includes a few items that are already moving (repeal January 15th contract deadline, repeal safe schools maintenance of effort, repeal 2% staff development set-aside) and several new provisions. One provision would repeal the Department of Education’s special education rule-making authority. Another provision of the bill would allow the commissioner of education to approve fund transfers if they didn’t increase state aid obligations. If the bill becomes law, districts with fewer than 10,000 residents (current law says fewer than 2,000) could use a principal or superintendent to serve as the community education director instead of needing someone with a specific community education director’s license. The bill is under review in the House Education Reform committee this week.
Governor Dayton’s education budget and policy proposals are under review as well. Holding K-12 harmless is popular among many legislators, but his $4.1 billion in new income taxes faces stiff opposition in the GOP legislature. The Dayton education plan would continue the 70/30 payment shift for four more years and then he would begin paying 10% of it back each year. Optional all day K funding would be funded for students who qualify for free and reduced priced meals. He would reward districts that can demonstrate growth in achievement over the course of a school year. The legislature has until March 25th to produce an education budget plan of their own.
Recently Introduced Legislation
A volley of new education related bills are now floating around the Capitol. Here’s a list of new pieces of legislation we are tracking:
SF 318 Jungbauer; requires schools to hold operating referendum elections on the general election date.
SF 410 Carlson; prohibits the commissioner of education from approving flexible learning year applications if they include a pre-labor day start.
HF 514 Michael Benson; modifies the sales tax exemption for schools.
HF 533 Fabian/SF 350 Stumpf; amends sparsity revenue calculations so a district isn’t penalized by a neighboring district’s change in building sites.
HF 535 McFarlane; allows parents to consent to third party billing on their child’s initial application for MN Care or Medical Assistance.
HF 550 Anzelc; increases the basic formula allowance from $5,124 to $5,324 in fiscal years 2012 and beyond. This is about a 4% increase in the formula allowance.
HF 557 Downey; requires the commissioner of education to contract with a consultant to work with school districts on shared services plans. The consultant would be paid by withholding aid from schools after savings are demonstrated.
HF 576 Kelley; makes the 70/30 payment schedule permanent.
HF 580 Ward; fully funds the state’s special education formula so there is no proration of funds.
HF 581 Ward; increases telecommunications equity access funding from $3.75 million/year to $8 million/year.
2.16.11 Update -- Governor's Budget Proposal Detail
Here are some of the details regarding education from the budget release by Governor Dayton. We tried to go through it and condense it to the details that most affect education.
Reducing MDE by $991,000 each year - which becomes a 5% reduction
Maintain Aid Payment Shift at 70/30 – This would be for FY 2012 and FY 2013 rather than shifting back to the 90/10 that is currently in statute. This saves $1.4 billion in FY 2012 and $31 million in FY 2013. This also has a 10 year payback schedule beginning in 2014. In addition, districts would receive their tax shift information in early June before district audits begin.
All Day Kindergarten Expansion – This would be new revenue beginning in FY 2013. Districts could chose to participate and receive aid in the amount of = ADM for free and reduce times GER times 0.388.
Governor’s Excellence in Education Award – This establishes a non-competitive grant to recognize schools with outstanding growth in student achievement to provide training or disseminate best practices to other schools. Up to 50% of the grant can be kept to maintain schools excellent performance - $7 million a year.
Achievement Gap Innovation Fund – New competitive grant to promote innovative approaches to closing the achievement gap and improving achievement for all students. $3 million annually through the MDE.
Statewide Early Childhood Rating System – An appropriation of $2 million in FY 2012 for the early childhood quality rating and improvement system. This funds classroom observation and feedback as part of this statewide system. Teachers are assessed in 3 areas – emotional climate, instructional support and classroom organization.
Eliminate Magnet School Grants – This would eliminate the competitive grant program resulting in $750,000 of savings in FY 2012 and FY 2013.
Eliminate Explore & PLAN tests – Elimination of the EPAS assessments would result in savings of $829,999 in FY 2012 and FY 2013.
Reduce Adult Basic Education Growth Factor – Changing the growth factor in ABE from 3% to 2% saves over $1 million in the next biennium.
Eliminate Q Comp Expansion Funding – Not adding any new schools would save $1.3 million in FY 2012 and $3.44 million in FY 2013. This would cap the program at its current number of schools – 50 school districts and 54 charter schools.
Charter School Lease Aid – Eliminate Grandfather Clause – Eliminating the “grandfather” formula allowances in excess of $1200 per pupil would save $734,000 in FY 2012 and $1.057 million in FY 2013.
Eliminate Charter School Start Up Aid – Savings of $420,000 in FY 2012 and $1.126 million in FY 2013 are the result of this change.
2.11.11 Update -- 2011 Session in Full Swing
The month of January was a transition month for the new GOP legislative majorities and Governor’s office as Mark Dayton and crew assumed the reigns of state government. The GOP majorities are busy moving a variety of education reform legislation forward in order to establish their policy priorities. Governor Dayton will announce his budget plan next Tuesday and we will be off to the races. A state budget update will arrive at the end of February, and rumors are it will show a slight improvement from the current $6.2 billion deficit to maybe somewhere closer to $5.7 billion. It is a welcomed rumor, but doesn’t change the overall dynamic of this budget setting session.
As for timing this year, it appears the GOP legislature will focus on the budget from now until March 25th when it is rumored that finance bills need to clear their respective budget divisions. The difference this year is it appears that policy legislation will move separately and actually have later deadlines (mid-April) than the budget bills. These are rumors and legislative plans are always subject to change. The legislature will take a spring/Easter/Passover break on Tuesday, April 19th through Monday, April 25th. When they come back they will have a few weeks to reach a budget agreement with Governor Dayton before the May 23rd constitutional end of session arrives.
Education Issues in Play
- Alternative licensure SF 40/HF 63 - both versions have passed their respective bodies. At this point the Senate either needs to concur with the House version and send it to the Governor or they can refuse to concur and send it to a conference committee. We will know Monday when the Senate goes back into session.
- Mandate relief and salary freeze SF 56/HF 381, 88, 442, 115 - The Senate passed SF 56 which contains a freeze on all school personnel salaries for the next two year contract that is entered into. The bill also contains a repeal of the January 15th contract deadline, safe schools maintenance of effort requirements and the staff development set-aside requirement. The House has not dealt with the salary freeze proposal, but has moved these mandated repeal bills forward as separate proposals. Additional mandate relief bills are introduced but haven’t received hearings yet.
- Pay for bus lease with operating capital funds SF 171/HF 301 - this legislation would allow a district to lease a bus with operating capital funds. The current statute allows for school bus purchases, but is silent on leasing a bus out of the operating capital fund. SF 171 is up Monday in the Senate E-12 committee and hasn’t been heard in the House as of yet.
- Short term borrowing repeal SF 209, 242/HF 407, 341 - this legislation would repeal the state’s ability to borrowing from schools if the state has cash flow problems. HF 407 was reviewed in the House K-12 Finance committee last week and has bi-partisan support.
- Limit continuing contracts for teachers to five years SF 251/no HF yet. This bill was reviewed by the Senate E-12 committee last week and was set aside for the time being. Chair Gen Olson said this topic will definitely be discussed this year along with a host of teacher quality reform initiatives, including assessment and entrance requirements (i.e. passing the basic skills reading exam). House Education Reform Chair Sondra Erickson has outlined a similar reform agenda.
Governor’s Education Agenda
In his state of the state address, Governor Dayton said he will stick with his campaign promise to increase education funding every year he is Governor. His starting point for this appears to be a phase in of optional all day, every day kindergarten. The current kindergarten funding weight is .612 of the basic formula allowance; a first grader is 1.115. We expect to see in the Governor’s budget proposal movement toward the 1.115 weight. How this gets paid for given the deficit fight that is about to ensue remains unknown. Rumors are the Governor is considering a blink on, blink off income tax hike as part of his budget balancing solution.
Testing reform will also be a focus for Governor Dayton. He wants the Commissioner of Education to establish a test reduction task force. He also wants a task force to look at redesigning the funding formula with a goal of having a proposal to the legislature sometime during this session.
Commissioner Slowly Builds Staff
In a meeting with Commissioner Cassellius this week, two familiar faces who are “helping out” in the department were introduced – Rose Hermodson and Barb Yates. Both are retired and had previously been in the department and were asked to come in to help the new commissioner get things going. The expectation is that they will be there through spring to give the department some time for selection of assistant commissioners.
Sen. Franken Joins Bipartisan Rural Education Caucus
MREA has been working with Senator Franken’s office for the past year to help them understand the issues of rural districts. We are very happy that he is taking an active step to help us.
Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) announced today (2/10/11) he has joined the bipartisan Senate Rural Education Caucus to help improve education in Minnesota’s rural communities.
“Minnesota’s rural communities face unique challenges when it comes to providing quality education for our kids,” said Sen. Franken. “I joined the Senate Rural Education Caucus because I want to ensure that our rural school districts receive the tools and resources they need and are not penalized during the reauthorization of ‘No Child Left Behind.’”
During his time in office, Sen. Franken has visited schools in rural communities across the state. As a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Sen. Franken intends to use the information he and his staff have gathered during discussions with educators, parents, and school administrators to look out for the interests of rural school districts during the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, also known as ‘No Child Left Behind.’
The goal of the Senate Rural Education Caucus is to help members of Congress more effectively address the educational needs of rural students, schools, and communities. The caucus is co-chaired by Sens. Jeff Bingaman (D-N. Mex.), Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), Kent Conrad (D-N. Dak.), and Susan M. Collins (R-Maine). Sen. Franken joins the caucus as an original member in the 112th Congress.
Education Finance Task Force – next chapter –
The Governor is putting together a task force to expand upon the work of the previous task force groups and is fast tracking their work to report back by mid-March. We don’t have any particulars at this time, but we will have one rural superintendent who will be part of this group. In his State of the State address this week, Governor Dayton emphasized that he intends to increase spending in education every year he is in office.
1.27.11 Update -- Salary Freeze and more…
Tuesday, the Senate Education Committee passed SF56 out of committee on a party line vote. SF56 calls for a 2 year salary freeze for all employees of a district. The freeze includes no increased compensation for cost of living, longevity or steps and lanes. It does not include employer contributions toward the cost of medical or dental insurance premiums, provided that employee contributions to the costs of medical or dental insurance premiums are not decreased. It also does not include those who will receive an increase in the rate of salary or wages for a contract or collective bargaining agreement in effect before July 1, 2011. The bill states that future contracts cannot provide a retroactive salary or wage increase that applies to the period before June 30, 2013. In addition, the bill repeals the 2% set aside for staff development, the safe school levy maintenance of effort requirement and the January 15th negotiations deadline for the next 2 years.
Education Bill Expectations…
We expect to see the education bill from the commissioner about February 15th, along with the rest of the Governor’s budget proposal. We may also see a press release this week on the administration’s plans to reform how testing is done in schools.
Federal Issues …
Secretary Duncan was in Minnesota this week stating that NCLB has to change. The President referred to this as well in last night’s State of the Union address. Secretary Duncan did knock Minnesota for not being as aggressive as other states in educational reform. He emphasized that we should all be investing more in pre-school education.
1.24.11 Update -- New Commissioner
Commissioner Brenda Cassellius met with members of the Alliance for Student Achievement including MREA last Thursday. Her remarks made it clear that the Dayton administration is working on an agenda of educational reform. Cassellius said we can expect to hear about testing reform as early as next week. We were left with the impression that this will be a bill educators will be pleased with. But since we haven’t seen it – time will tell.
The Commissioner did say that she was charged with creating a children’s cabinet across the various departments of state government indicating that they are interested in early education.
Her first public meeting was held in Perham last Tuesday. Area districts, educators and residents were invited to the daylong event. She felt it was an indication that she is serious about rural education; an area she will be looking to us for help.
Education Issues in the Capitol Mix
Alternative licensure modeled after the Teach for America program continues to be reviewed by House and Senate education reform committees. Teacher performance assessments and principal evaluations will be part of the legislative discussion this session as well. Mandate relief and changes to the public employee labor relations act (PELRA) will be considered now that the GOP has the majority in the House and Senate.
The new GOP majorities announced plans last week to cut $1 billion from the budget deficit, mostly through making previous one-time cuts permanent. K-12 was not included in any part of this “Phase I” budget balancing proposal. The GOP legislation will move the proposal forward, but Governor Dayton has said he prefers to deal with the budget deficit in one large negotiation instead of a multi-phase approach.
1.14.11 Update - Bills are Flowing In
The new majorities are moving to establish their principles and, as a start, are reducing the daily per diems legislators receive. There were other bills introduced, and the House had their initial hearing on alternative licensure.
HF3 would establish an alternative teacher preparation program in which qualified candidates in programs approved by the Board of Teaching would receive a two-year provisional license as a path to acquiring a standard teaching license. School districts would sponsor a program in agreement with the teacher bargaining unit. Qualified candidates would be the teacher of record in a classroom, would have a bachelor’s degree with a minimum of a 3.0 grade point average, would have passed basic skills tests and would have participated in at least 200 hours of instruction. They would also receive ongoing training and support. No action was taken by the committee.
Last year alternative licensure bills were opposed by the teacher’s union, but this week they came out and said they will have a bill of their own.
1.7.11 Update - Legislature Convenes
This week the House and Senate opened their doors for business. While it might not be business as usual with the turnover in majorities, the committees have begun to meet. This first week is a chance for the new committee chairs to get their legs under them and for the new committee members to get a feel for what is going to happen. This is the time of getting everyone sworn in, passing the gavel and observing the traditions of government.
The Legislature will be waiting for the Governor to deliver his budget, which might not be until mid-February. Then they will wait for the budget forecast, which will come at the end of February or first week in March, before they really kick it in gear. That isn’t to say that nothing will happen now. There will be bills submitted and committees will do background work.
Now is a good time to be visiting with your representatives and senators about the issues that are important to your district. Share your stories with them. It will help them understand the impact of legislation when these issues come up in discussions or in committee.
