Full Funding Coalition – Round Two
Time: 3:30 p.m. – 4:21 p.m.
Randy Parr starts off by expressing that their proposal is just that, a proposal. While it does outline clear benchmarks, these are explicitly stated only to provide an example of one way we could move forward in the short-term. To that end, the suggested six-year transition to the new funding plan includes:
- The state enriches funding through the current system for the 2009-11 biennium.
- The state would convert to the new Foundation Formula in 2011-2013.
- The CQEW reviews initial progress and makes recommendations for subsequent additional funding.
- The state makes additional payments on known, prioritized interventions during 2013-2015 budget cycle.
- Some additional interventions are necessarily spread across all six years.
Sup. Bergeson asks for clarification on student-weighted formula.
Randy continues to explain the year one phase in would include: K-3 class size reduction to 1:17, ramping up the phase-in of all day kindergarten, implementing additional relevant professional development, resources for struggling students, implementing behavior support systems, increasing support staff for principals and begin phase-in for NERCs.
Year two example includes: continue to increase K-3 class size reduction, all-day kindergarten, and additional ESA’s for classified staff, adding funding for key instructional programs in core subjects, and adding campus security funds for middle and high schools.
So – the cost: $1.2 billion increase in the next biennium. The most significant portion, about a quarter, of would increase teacher COLAs.
Randy goes on to outline a few revenue source ideas that would cover the first two years worth of reform efforts:
- Capturing a portion of future growth. Transferring half of anticipated new revenue (above %5) in 09-11 would yield $500 million for public education.
- Recapture the currently uncollected regular property tax authority to provide new revenue to school districts. Currently the state has reserved a total rate of $3.60 per $1,000 of assessed value, but the state property tax rate for schools in calendar year 2010 is expected to be $2.12 per $1,000 of assessed value
First question is, unsuprisingly, about the price tag. Rep. Fred Jarrett asks if $1.2 billion is the total cost. Randy Parr says no. When the study was completed it recommended 45% increase (of 10 billion at the time). The study has not been updated. There is not a specific dollar amount to the proposal – but do suggest a specific amount in the short term. We’re offering more because we want to prove that it can be done.
Next, Sup. Bergeson asks about teacher compensation reform and distribution. Randy Parry points out that they advocate for a salary survey and adjustments made according to that. He also noted that they discussed some local teacher compensation experimentation, but did not develop a specific proposal to this end.
Rep. Priest asks Randy Parr and Paul Rosier if the Full Funding Coalition can have an open discussion about
any of the ideas presented to the Task Force (bargaining at the state level for example), or if the coalition partners should discuss the issues separately. Both Mr. Rosier and Mr. Parr assured Rep. Priest that they would continue to try and work together.
Sup. Kowalkowski asks how realistic the revenue source proposals are – especially the property tax increase. Randy Parr acknowledged the difficulty of the property tax increase by stating that the property tax is the tax most legislators love to hate.
And so the day – and live blogging – comes to an end.