WashACE Blog

Keep our best teachers? It's a "no-brainer."

Partnership for Learning and Stand for Children have sponsored a radio ad in support of HB 1443 that is running on radio stations across the state starting today, Wednesday, April 20. Listen to the ad here and read the text below. Also, read an op-ed in Publicola by Washington Roundtable President Steve Mullin.

Most important, call your legislators and tell them to stand for children. Urge a yes vote for HB 1443. 

Here's the text of the radio ad:

Our schools face some difficult choices: budget cuts and teacher layoffs.

 What do you think matters most when deciding which teachers to lay off?

Seniority or excellence?

It's a no-brainer, right?

Wrong.

When it comes to layoffs and teachers, excellence should trump seniority. But in Washington schools today, pink slips go to teachers with the fewest years in the classroom-regardless of their performance.

And guess what? Students suffer.

Our leaders in Olympia are listening. We say "thank you" to senators from both parties who voted to keep our most effective teachers in the classroom. And we urge House members to vote yes on HB 1443.

Because excellence in our classrooms should matter more than seniority.

Visit GreatTeachersWA.org to learn more and contact your legislators.

 

Analysts compare house and senate budget proposals

The Washington Research Council posted its comparison of the house and senate budget proposals, concluding that the senate version

makes many of the same reductions as the House-passed bill, but it cuts $326.7 million more. The need for deeper cuts is a consequence of not assuming that $300 million would be raised by privatiz- ing the distribution of liquor.

 On the education front, the Partnership For Learning evaluates each of the budget proposals and provides a budget breakdown chart comparing the governor, house and senate's budgets on PFL priorities.

Similarly, the Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board compares the three budgets for treatment of their key K-12, community college, and workforce education issues. 

 Finally, on the workers' compensation reform front, the procedural move last week to bring SSB 5566 to the house floor for a vote failed, but the bill has been deemed NTIB -- or necessary to implement the budget -- so there is still the possibility of it being part of the final budget solution. 

Continue your calls and letters to your legislators. Tell them to pass a sustainable budget within existing revenues that includes important voluntary settlements for injured workers.

Effective education reform must include consolidation & restructuring

   Depending on who's speaking and what precisely they're talking about, education reform and consolidation proposals in Olympia are moving, stalling, changing or dying. The AP reports:

The governor's plan would eliminate the State Board of Education, the Department of Early Learning and nearly 10 other departments, boards and committees and place their functions under a new Department of Education. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction would still oversee K-12 education but most administrative matters would move to the new department.

Under Gregoire's proposal, the governor would - starting next year - nominate a secretary of education, who would need confirmation from the state Senate. Gregoire said she foresees a nationwide search for a professional to head the department, someone with vision and leadership skills but also expertise in education...

Gregoire said she has heard some people think she is trying to change things too quickly.

"We can't go fast enough," she said.

   On the other hand:

[State Rep. Sharon Tomiko] Santos said everyone agrees that the state's education system is fragmented and that Washington needs a seamless system from early learning through college, but she supports a different approach...

   And at least one legislator would go further:

Sen. Rodney Tom has taken the idea one step further and proposed eliminating the superintendent of public instruction as an elected position. His idea would require a constitutional amendment because the superintendent's job was established by the state constitution. His proposal, which consists of two bills, was heard in the Senate Education Committee but has not come for a vote.  

    At a gathering of business lobbyists today in Olympia, Attorney General Rob McKenna said the idea of eliminating the superintendent's elected position has zero chance of being supported by the legislature. He said there were divides between democrats and republicans or between house and senate, but those divides pale against the divide between the legislative and executive branches of state government. The legislature is not going to give the executive more power by eliminating the elected education superintendent...even if it makes sense to do so, he said.

Jerry Cornfield's report in the Everett Herald confirms that this proposal is moot for now...he quotes Gregoire:

"I think everyone believed we need to move forward and that [this part of the proposal] can't hold us back," she said. "This is not about Randy Dorn and Chris Gregoire. This is about our children and their future."

   Meanwhile, Jim Camden reports in the Spokesman Review quotes the governor:

“It’s not adequate for tomorrow; it’s not even adequate for today,” she said of the state’s scattered authorities on education. “Everybody’s defending their turf.”

  In their Thrive Washington paper on consolidation of the executive branch the Washington Roundtable and the Washington Research Council recommend that the state should:

Place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that eliminates the elected office of superintendent of public instruction.

 

First cut-off claims teacher performance bill; supplemental budget moves forward

News from Olympia is mixed this morning...

Seattle Times reports that the business-supported bill requiring teacher performance be considered over seniority in school lay-off decisions is dead after missing the first cut-off in the House. 

The News Tribune says that House and Senate leadership conferees signed their supplemental budget report last night, clearing the way for voting as early as today.

And, Eric Smith reports in Washington State Wire concern that the budget compromise treats state employees differently. Here's an excerpt: 

 The budget bill that is expected to go to the House and Senate floors today sets up two classes of employees in state government, and it gives the state’s 16,200 non-union employees a worse deal than the one that was extended to unionized workers in December.

The non-union workers get an actual 3-percent pay cut, not the flexible furlough plan Gov. Christine Gregoire worked out with the unions at the bargaining table. That means non-union workers will be paid less for working the same number of hours.

 And the non-union workers get the whack immediately, on April 1. Most members of the state’s public-employee unions won’t start taking furloughs until the beginning of July.

Hmmm.

 

Message to lawmakers: Move HB 1609/SB 5399

The Tacoma News Tribune calls it a "no-brainer". 

Seattle Times says their "hope is that enough lawmakers are more concerned about the education of children than appeasing the Washington Education Association."

They're referring to business-supported HB 1609 (and its companion SB 5399), which would value teacher performance over seniority in any future budget-driven layoffs.

If legislators kill the bills with inaction, they are ignoring the calls of parents, education groups and brave teachers who've gone against their union on this issue. Lawmakers will be thumbing their noses at informed research, including the University of Washington's study underscoring the academic harm to students when layoffs rob classrooms of effective teachers.

Worse, lawmakers will be prizing their own political skins above children. 

Couldn't have said it better...so I won't. 

 

Teacher lay-off criteria debated in Olympia

HB 1609 proposes to change the criteria for how reductions-in-force are handled in the schools. If passed, a teacher's performance would carry more weight than his/her seniority. The bill analysis is worth a read, if you haven't been there yet.

Peter Callaghan reports for The News Tribune on Tuesday's hearing. These excerpts give a flavor of the frustration spurred by this important issue:

Love it or hate it, teacher evaluation is a topic that something calling itself an education committee should discuss. Especially one controlled by the same party as President Obama, who has placed it on his school reform agenda.

But the hearing on the bill sounded like an audition for the next Chipmunks movie, with 17 witnesses rapidly saying what they needed to say in less than a minute each. If they failed, they were cut off by Chairwoman Sharon Tomiko Santos, sometimes in mid-sentence...

Proponents said it makes no sense to leave weak teachers on the job and lay off better teachers simply because of seniority...Backers argue that without consequences such as pay, layoffs and retention, the new evaluation system won’t be taken seriously.

Some legislators are trying to make the bill more palatable to opponents, and it would probably pass if it came to a vote. But the bill does not appear to have much push from Democratic leaders such as House Speaker Frank Chopp. There doesn’t appear to be an appetite in a session marked by budget cuts and layoffs to take on the WEA over seniority.

This business-backed bill is more important than ever as our schools face budget cutting that will result in layoffs. How we handle these cuts will lay the foundation for the education system we will have in the future to support the state's eventual economic recovery and growth. 

 

Additional comments on the governor's proposed budget solutions

Earlier we posted on the governor's letter to legislative leaders urging them to take swift action to close the budget gap. Maybe I'm missing something, but the initial response from Sen. Majority Leader Lisa Brown suggests things may take a while.

“The people who will be affected by these cuts have nowhere else to go. They’ve already exhausted all their options, and I want to make sure we exhaust all of ours before we make a decision like this.

“This process won’t be quick and it won’t be easy.

“Cuts will no doubt be necessary, but I believe there are reforms we can make within government that can also achieve significant cost savings.

The Seattle PI has more on Brown's response. This is true:

The choices left to policymakers are bleak because finding additional revenue - i.e., raising taxes - is not currently an option. At this point the reforms Brown seeks will not be enough.

Coincidentally (I suspect) Sen. Joe Zarellie posted another of the Senate Republicans' "reset" videos yesterday, calling for changes in collective bargaining. He suggests that in a financial emergency, the collective bargaining agreement out to "become moot." He also takes on seniority rights.

House Democrats also put up a blog post referencing the governor's request. The post gives no clue as to leadership's intentions, beyond acknowledging the road ahead is bumpy.

An AP story on the Seattle PI's website raises questions about teacher compensation, with a familiar name offering perceptive insights.

On Friday, billionaire Bill Gates took aim at school budgets and the master's degree bonus.

"My own state of Washington has an average salary bump of nearly $11,000 for a master's degree - and more than half of our teachers get it. That's more than $300 million every year that doesn't help kids," he said.

"And that's one state," said Gates, the co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, at a speech Friday in Louisville to the Council of Chief State School Officers. Gates also took aim at pensions and seniority.

These are conversations worth having, made urgent by the times.

"Of course, restructuring pay systems is like kicking a beehive," he acknowledged.

DSHS announces spending cuts. Also, fiscal reports cards hit the streets.

The Seattle Times reports that administrators at the Department of Social and Health Services have released their plans for complying with the governor's across-the-board spending cuts.

Cutting programs for the mentally ill, disabled and poor elderly residents, the state's Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) announced Wednesday a wide swath of reductions totaling nearly $281 million and bringing a flood of concern from advocates for the poor and vulnerable.

The 6.3 percent across-the-board cuts, some of which will begin in October, include nearly $113 million of state funding for Medicaid programs providing hospice care to the dying, and medical care for those too disabled to work, children and pregnant women, among others.

We've written before that a special session would be required to make smarter, targeted reductions.A top DSHS administrator agrees.

Doug Porter, state Medicaid director, said he had virtually no flexibility in making the reductions.

"We are looking to the Legislature to come in and make more strategic and thoughtful cuts than these across-the-board cuts," he said.

More in the Olympian.

Pnder -- Washington ranks third on superstar analyst Meredith Whitney says Washington has the third best financial condition among the 16 largest states. And the Cato Institutue gives our governor one of the 7 Fs handed out.

Of course, one does not preclude the other.

School Funding Decision Changes Budget Debate

But probably not this year. King County Superior Court Judge John Erlick's long (103 pages) analysis concluded that the state was not living up to its constitutional obligation to fund fully basic education. Here's the crux:

State funding is not ample, it is not stable, and it is not dependable.  Local school districts continue to rely on local levies and other non-State resources to supplement state funding for a basic program of education.  Recent legislation addresses, but does not resolve, the perennial underfunding of basic education.  Accordingly, the State is directed to determine the cost of amply providing for basic education and a basic program of education for all children resident in the State of Washington.  The State must also comply with the Constitutional mandate to provide stable and dependable funding for such costs of basic education. 

He concludes with this:

The means of fulfilling this Constitutional mandate properly fall within the prerogative of the Legislature.

What that means exactly, I don't know. Erlick chose the Potter Stewart standard when it came to defining "ample." Or maybe an inverted Potter Stewart, more along the lines of "I know it when I don't see it." No one seems particularly surprised by the finding. The question now is whether or not it will be appealed to the state Supreme Court, which has seen more than its share of school funding cases over time.

Linda Shaw's Seattle Times reporting provides more context. 

"He left the remedy for whatever ails the system in the Legislature's hands, and we believe that's where it belongs," said Assistant Attorney General Bill Clark.

Clark also said it appears that the judge would allow the state to fulfill his order by carrying out plans in a bill passed last year — House Bill 2261 — which set 2018 as a deadline for a number of changes in how the state funds it schools. The bill also expanded the state's definition of what constitutes a "basic" education.

Key legislative leaders agree with the decision, as KING 5 reports.

"I absolutely agree with the court," said Rep. Ross Hunter, R-Medina.

The Chair of the Senate's Education Committee said the decision could help convince legislators, and the public, that more needs to be done to fund schools.

"That's really what we needed," said Senator Rosemary McAuliffe, D-Bothell, "We needed to be pushed by the courts to do that."

Sen. McAuliffe does not know if school funding reforms will require new taxes, but she said, "It provides us an opportunity to go out to the public and take the case to them."

The Columbian is out quickly with a good editorial. It's about setting priorities.

Now it’s up to the politicians to prioritize public education and meet the constitutional mandate without raising taxes.

We'll see how that works out.

Getting the Jobs Agenda Right

At WashACE, we're pro-job. Not a bold stance, I recognize. With state unemployment at 9.5 percent, I reckon everyone is pro-job. Nationally, we've seen the conversation shift - I think 'pivot' is the term of art - from health care to jobs. Particularly middle-class jobs. Particularly if they're in small businesses.

I'm not sure if unemployed workers are that picky about where they're next job comes from a small business or a large one. And, of course, a lot of small businesses exist primarily as corporate suppliers or service businesses that depend on the customer base provided by major regional employers. But, quibbles aside, it's good to see jobs back at the top of the legislative agendas here and in D.C.

Last week, Wenatchee World editorial page editor Tracy Warner wrote a good column on government's role in job creation.

I wish government could create jobs at will. A vote, a law, the stroke of a pen, and there you have it — tens of thousands of people returned to gainful employment. If that is not the way it actually works, sometimes that’s what they want us to think. If only it could.

After noting the particularly tough employment conditions today, Warner notes:

If government could create productive jobs at will it would do a lot more of it. More often, the taxing-and-hiring schemes cost more jobs than they create. If these plans worked we could be happily employed filling in holes government hired people to dig. But, if government can’t create jobs itself, it can create the conditions and help supply the means for private business to create jobs, the kind of jobs that produce more wealth than they consume. It’s been done.

Surveying the landscape of current legislative proposals he identifies some good and not-so-good ideas.

Gov. Gregoire wants tax credits for small businesses hiring new employees. She wants tax incentives for private investment. She wants streamlined permitting and regulation. This will lower the government-added cost of hiring. Make hiring new employees less expensive and you increase the odds people will do it.

Senate Democrats today endorsed the governor's tax break. (Link is to Publicola; not yet up on Senate site.) UPDATE: LInk on Senate site here.

Warner's skeptical of some other ideas.

The “green jobs” gambit, the idea that government can create an entirely new industry by subsidizing uneconomical forms of energy production, has not worked elsewhere and won’t work here.

...Other plans have little more promise. Adding $860 million to the state’s debt load to pay people to insulate schools is unlikely to have as much positive impact as promoters contend. It will save $190 million a year in energy costs, they say, but with energy prices so low in this state, large returns are not easily found. And borrowing such sums is problematical.

I share his skepticism. And I'm a little less confident in the small business tax break. People hire when it makes sense to hire from a business perspective. But it might help. Of more help would be action to reform workers' compensation and mitigate the extraordinary unemployment insurance tax increases that just hit employers here.

Warner's conclusion sums it up well.

The old-fashioned, less photogenic means of government job creation still work. Build on our infrastructure — transportation, energy, education, basic research. Do all to remain fiscally sound and minimize risk. Keep taxes on employment low and predictable. Do that first.

Do that. And don't do this.