January 30 - February 3, 2006
This week’s links:
House School Finance Committee continues Post Audit discussion
For three days this week, the House Select Committee on School Finance reviewed and heard testimony on portions of the Legislative Post Audit Cost Study.
Tuesday: At-risk funding
The study recommends a new weighting of .484, up from the current .193. In addition, they recommend an additional weighting of .242 for four school districts which have a high density of students living in poverty. Research they reviewed indicated that where poverty is highly concentrated, schools face additional challenges in moving students to high levels of achievement. Under the LPA recommendation, all schools would see a dramatic increase in at-risk funds while the Kansas City, Turner, Wichita, and Topeka school districts would receive the additional “urban poverty weight.”
KNEA lobbyist Mark Desetti expressed support for the higher weightings but also discussed other related issues being discussed in the capitol. There continues to be pressure to change the distribution of at-risk funds from the number of free-lunch students in a district to some other at-risk indicator. For example, a proposal this year would distribute the at-risk weighting based on the number of children below proficient in math or reading on a standardized test.
KNEA has supported legislative efforts to expand the method by which the state distributes at-risk funding to include other indicators in addition to poverty. The problem is in getting the funds to the districts in an efficient way.
“When,” Desetti said, “a student is found to be failing several classes mid-semester, the student will be deemed at-risk and get services. Would a change in fund distribution allow that student to generate the funds beginning mid-semester? That is the difficulty. Use of free lunch is an efficiency standard for distribution.”
In addition, Desetti suggested that using only test scores in reading and math would allow many students to slip between the cracks:
“A reliance on test scores in reading and math would indeed identify some students in need of at-risk services. But it would not help a number of other students. As an example, consider the on grade-level pregnant teen. Dealing with pregnancy, child birth, and child rearing can put even the best of students in danger of dropping out – they would be ‘at risk.’”
Wednesday: Bilingual funding
The study recommends changing the calculation of bilingual weighting from a count of time spent with a bilingual or ESL endorsed teacher to a pure headcount. Under this recommendation, those districts not currently receiving bilingual funds for bilingual students because they have no staff members with the appropriate endorsement, would get funding for a program. But the Post Audit also recommended reducing the weighting from .393 to .1 causing a reduction in funding for those districts currently receiving dollars based on personnel.
KNEA lobbyist Mark Desetti expressed support for the headcount approach but suggested that the reduction in the weighting punished school districts with significant bilingual numbers who had been successful in recruiting or training teachers. Desetti reminded the committee of how they arrived at the new higher weighting in 2005:
“I am sure this committee recalls why the weighting was raised to its current level last year. As you reviewed data from school districts, you discovered that our weighting provided only about half of what districts were spending on these programs. With that discovery, you raised the weighting to the point that it provided the amount of money that was being spent in this area. “
Desetti concluded by asking the committee to accept the recommendation on using headcount for distributing the weighting but to reconsider the lower weighting. Said Desetti, “We agree that those areas that have bilingual students and do not have bilingual teachers should receive program funding because they do have the challenge of meeting the needs of those students. The headcount recommendation does this. We don’t think that the other school districts – many of whom have large numbers of bilingual students – should lose funding.”
Thursday: Enrollment weighting
Thursday’s discussion focused on what is probably the most controversial part of the study – low-enrollment weighting. KNEA submitted written testimony allowing superintendents of small school districts to have the Committee’s time.
At issue is the reduction proposed in the low enrollment weighting. Many small school districts would lose money under the four scenarios in the report – three input scenarios based on class sizes of 20, 25, or 18/23 (18 in primary, 23 in other grades) and one outcomes scenario. Under the outcomes scenario, for example, 140 school districts would lose or see no increase in state funding. For this reason, the Post Audit recommended that the Legislature consider a “hold harmless” provision under which no school district would lose money. In written testimony, KNEA lobbyist Mark Desetti told the Committee, “Given that costs continue to rise – particularly in the areas of insurance, fuel, and utilities – we believe that a “hold harmless” provision is not ‘harmless.’”
Desetti concluded by saying, “Ensuring that all schools – large and small – are able to maintain and improve the education program for students is essential for the good of those students, the health of their communities, and the economic well-being of our state.”
Next week…
Continuing in the study mode, the Committee will take up the regional cost index and transportation weighting next week.
First school finance bill introduced – and it’s a doozy!
Senator Jim Barnett (R-Emporia) has introduced the first school finance bill of the session. It is just a conceptual bill as of this time and we will review it carefully when it is written. Over four years the bill would phase in an increase in at-risk weighting from the current .193 to .347 in four steps, increase the bilingual weighting from the current .395 to .482 in one step, and increase base state aid from the current $4,257 to $4,618 in four steps. The bill is an increase of $50 million in year one, $75 million in year two, and $100 million each in years three and four. The Legislative Post Audit cost study indicates that $399 million in new funding is needed now.
KNEA members Blitz All Legislators Early!
A record number of KNEA political activists came in for the annual Blitz All Legislators Early (BALE) event, making their presence known under the dome.
KNEA members from every corner of Kansas spent two days in Topeka – Sunday for a briefing by KNEA lobbyists Mark Desetti and Terry Forsyth and Monday for meetings with their legislators. Nearly 60 people participated in the event. Many were on hand in the Senate Education Committee to hear Desetti share the KNEA legislative agenda and to comment on the Legislative Post Audit cost study.
BALE was especially sweet this year as it has faced last minute cancellations for several years due to inclement weather and the funeral of a long-time state legislator. This year marked no snow or tragedy.
Kansas Schools for the Deaf and Blind get a budget hearing; request funding to fulfill salary promise
The House Education Budget Subcommittee listened to a presentation by William Daugherty, Superintendent of the School for the Blind, and Robert Maile, Superintendent of the School for the Deaf. Unlike other schools in the K-12 education system, these two institutions are treated as separate agencies under the State Department of Education. They must ask for their budget allocation separately and are not part of the school finance formula.
Of particular concern to KNEA is the fact that teacher salaries at these schools have fallen behind their surrounding school districts, making them far less competitive in attracting personnel. Representative Arlen Siegfreid (R-Olathe) sponsored legislation to ensure that their salaries matched those of the Olathe School District. The appropriation for the 2005-06 school year was based on an estimate of the raise Olathe teachers might get. In reality, Olathe settled for a much better raise and, as a result, the schools for the deaf and blind cannot match the Olathe salaries as required.
To make up the difference, the Kansas State School for the Deaf (KSSD) is asking for a supplemental appropriation for 2006 of $229,575 and an additional $232,097 for 2007. The Kansas State School for the Blind (KSSB) is asking for a supplemental appropriation for 2006 of $67,145 and an additional $150,071 for 2007. In the case of the KSSB, if the supplemental appropriation for 2006 is granted, the $150,071 can be reduced by that amount.
The Committee plans to work budgets beginning next week.
Controversial bills begin getting hearings this week
House Fed and State Committee hears HB 2615, the repeal of in-state tuition for immigrant children
The House Federal and State Affairs Committee met to hear House Bill 2615 which repeals a law granting in-state tuition rates to the children of undocumented workers who have attended a Kansas high school for at least three years, graduated from a Kansas high school or earned a GED in Kansas, and signed an affidavit promising to pursue legal status in the United States.
The law granting in-state tuition is only two years old. Anti-immigrant groups challenged the law in federal court last year but their lawsuit was dismissed.
House Bill 2615 was proposed by Representative Becky Hutchins (R-Holton) who spoke in favor of the bill. Joining her was Kris Kobach, the one-time congressional candidate and Missouri law school professor who unsuccessfully carried the challenge in federal court. Three other citizens spoke in favor of the repeal.
Those asking that the committee reject HB 2165 included Kansas NEA, the Board of Regents, the Kansas Hispanic and Latino Affairs Commission, Kansas League of Women Voters, Kansas Association of School Boards, the Kansas Catholic Conference, El Centro, Kansas United Methodist Women, the American GI Forum, several students, an immigration attorney, an ESL teacher, USD 259 (Wichita), Kansas Families United for Public Education, and the owner of a tax preparation service in Wichita.
KNEA was represented by lobbyist Mark Desetti, who told the committee:
“These children did not come here consciously violating our immigration laws. They came with their parents. They attended our schools. They struggled and succeeded in learning English. They worked hard to get the kind of grades needed to enter our universities. They deserve a chance to get a post secondary education. These young people are committed to life in this great nation. Passage of HB 2615 will deny these young people the chance to pursue their dreams and to live that life well. We urge you to continue to reward these high achieving, hard working students for a job well done. It’s not about how their parents came here; it’s about what those kids did once they got here.”
The hearing took all the time allotted. The committee will take up the bill at some later date.
Senate Fed and State Committee hears SB 418, the concealed carry weapons bill
The Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee held a hearing on Senate Bill 418, the concealed carry firearms bill proposed by Senator Phil Journey (R-Wichita). A similar bill passed in 1997 and was vetoed by Governor Bill Graves; the 2004 version was vetoed by Governor Kathleen Sebelius.
As written, the bill prohibits license holders from carrying their weapons in school buildings and at athletic events off campus but it allows firearms at other school activities off campus. A license holder could carry a loaded firearm on a school fieldtrip or to a school band concert or debate tournament held off campus. KNEA testified that, while we had no organizational position on concealed carry per se, we did believe that children must be protected and asked the committee to amend the bill by prohibiting firearms at all school activities off campus (there is an exception in the bill for schools that have rifle teams).
In his testimony lobbyist Mark Desetti told the committee, “While it (the bill) prohibits the carrying of firearms at school athletic events or into school facilities, we believe these two exceptions are too limiting. For example, in places where school bands and orchestras perform in community centers or performing arts centers, would firearms be allowed if not otherwise posted? Would firearms be prohibited on school field trips? These would be school activities but not athletic activities. Firearms must not be allowed near any school function or activity regardless of where that activity might be.”
The Kansas Association of School Boards joined Kansas NEA in asking that a prohibition on carrying concealed weapons to any school, community college, college, or university sponsored activity be added to the bill.
The bill will be worked next week.
Curriculum standard review bill moves out of committee
The Senate Education Committee amended Senate Bill 329 and passed it on to the full Senate for consideration. This bill would change the cycle for curriculum standards review from three years to seven years. KNEA had expressed support for the extension of time but objected to an additional change in the statute that would have removed the words “equal to the best standards” from the description of Kansas standards. In an amendment, the committee changed the language to reflect a requirement for “high academic standards.”
With that amendment accepted, the bill was passed out of committee and will be sent to the full Senate.
|
Archives
Printer friendly
E-mail
Subscibe