Budget plan fails with local teachers

See budget summary, actual bill, agency details:

o House budget plan adopted April 9: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/detail/2011/ho1113p.aspn

o Senate budget proposal unveiled Tuesday: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/detail/2011/so1113p.asp

To the relief of Clark County educators, a proposed two-year budget plan unveiled by the Washington state Senate on Tuesday doesn’t touch levy equalization dollars vital to school districts here.

That follows the path taken by House legislators, who passed their spending blueprint on Saturday.

But the 2011-13 budget authored by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, and Sen. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, takes some hefty swings at teachers and K-12 public schools, regardless.

School spending bears a large brunt of the reductions in state-funded programs aimed at slashing $4.8 billion from the state deficit.

A quick recap:

• Statewide school payments are cut $213 million, assuming a 3 percent salary reduction for certificated teachers and assistants and classified school employees, same as other state employees. (The state can’t impose the actual salary cut but assumes districts would do so, with fewer state funds).

At the same time, teachers’ average classroom size would rise from 23 to 25 pupils in grades K-3, from 26 to 27 pupils in grade 4. That’s with the elimination of the last chunk of statewide funding to reduce class size in those grades — saving $163 million.

• State payments to school districts would be cut by more than $92 million, based on daily student attendance counts that would ding districts with higher unexcused absence rates.

Just how real-time attendance data, truancy duty and spending formulas would be reconciled is left to state school leaders, with legislators’ final approval.

• A $5,090 pay bonus for teachers who earn certification by the National Board for Professional Teacher Standards would expire after three years, as would a second $5,000 bonus for those who then work in an academically challenged school.

That would result in $74 million in savings, which is even more frugal than a bipartisan education bill co-sponsored by Zarelli that would preserve those bonuses for teachers who earn top-tier job evaluations.

Small wonder that some educators believe they’ve been swatted, while district administrators are scratching their heads over a few proposed changes.

“Wouldn’t it be nice if we were racing to the best, instead of the worst?” said Ann Giles, head of the Vancouver district teachers union. She cites national data from 2010 showing Washington with the nation’s third-highest classroom size (behind only California and Utah).

“All this is under the context that this is (legislators’) constitutional paramount duty,” Giles said. “Third-worst class size in the country is not ‘ample funding’ of public education.”

Either the House or Senate budget plan would push Washington “further away from average, way below average,” she said. “There just doesn’t seem to be the will of the people, or the Legislature, to have quality education in this state.”

Other state workers have seen 3 percent salary cuts. But K-12 teachers haven’t had a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in four years now, and have meantime lost three state-paid contract days, Giles and others noted.

Clark County educators expect property-rich districts near Puget Sound, such as those already pocketing more local property taxes under changes adopted last year by the Legislature, to more easily absorb the 3 percent loss, putting local schools at a disadvantage.

It’s not much different than if the Senate actually had lopped levy equalization dollars, said Steve Olsen, budget director for Vancouver Public Schools. He estimated the additional loss for VPS at about $3 million, pushing total spending reductions to $12 million or $13 million.

Local labor deals have to be reworked, or districts must cut program spending elsewhere, Olsen said. He called the budget provision “unfair.”

“It’s going to re-create the inequity that the state tried to get rid of” two decades ago with a state pay matrix, said Ellen Joslin, Battle Ground district teachers union president. “I think our biggest concern is having the resources to do right by the kids, having the manpower and time. But it doesn’t look like it is, for our state leaders,” she said.

Talk about context: Was it only 11 years ago that ballot measures to pump extra state money to reduce class sizes (Initiative 728: 72 percent statewide, 70 percent Clark County); and to ensure annual teacher COLAs (I-732: 63 percent “yes” statewide, 57 percent in Clark County) won such resounding public support?

Of course, legislators who’ve faced budget woes have sharply reduced or left unfunded those costly enhancements, for several years running.

Undesired outcomes?

Zarelli was unmoved by the many complaints.

“All I know is, all state employees ought to be treated the same. Everybody gets a little less,” he said. It’s up to districts to figure how to handle the 3 percent adjustment, he said. “I’m having a hard time understanding how what the teacher gets paid in any one year affects a student’s ability to learn,” he said.

The Senate plan spends $378 million more on K-12 education in the next biennium than was spent in the current two-year cycle, Zarelli said. There are targeted increases, such as one for grades K-3 classroom teachers in poverty-area schools. Per-pupil state spending continues to increase.

But, the newest proposal is fraught with reductions bound to set off new “unintended consequences,” Giles said.

She and Olsen questioned the wisdom of tying daily absentee rates to state funding. Who defines an “unexcused absence,” which could owe to a family crisis or a community flu wave? they ask. Who pays for ramped-up record keeping, who chases down parents by telephone or truant students on the street?

“The more micro-managing they do of how a school manages kids, the more resources they take away from kids,” Giles said. “Someone’s going to be working in the central office. … (It’s) only going to hurt our most struggling schools. The kids that need the most funding are going to get less.”

Zarelli’s response: “Why are we sending money to schools where head count shows students don’t show up?” The new formula would provide a badly needed prod for better oversight and teaching in troubled schools, he said.

“What I know is, we can’t continue to just pay districts money for the results we’re seeing in those districts,” he said.

‘Contrary’ changes

Union leaders said to dump the National Board certification bonus after three years adds additional, self-inflicted insult.

“If our goal is to get more highly trained teachers, we’re kind of shooting ourselves in the foot. That’s going to hurt a lot of people. They feel that’s a promise made to them,” Joslin said

It’s estimated teachers put 800 or so hours into intensive Board training, she said. “You don’t put that much effort in, without the incentive.”

Also Tuesday, the Senate approved education reforms (House Bill 1443) with an amendment that adds teacher evaluation rules sought by Zarelli and Sen. Rodney Tom, D-Medina. (The House would need to approve the amendment).

Should budget troubles force districts to lay off teachers, they must cut first those with lowest job evaluations, rather than use seniority guidelines (future labor contracts must abide this provision). Low-rated teachers could not be shuttled to low-performing schools, without that school principal’s consent.

While reform advocates hailed the change, Giles recoiled.

“They’re two contrary ideas: forced layoffs, teacher quality. They’re not connected, and that’s the wrong approach,” Giles said.

She said lowest-rated teachers are typically those new to the job, scaling a sharp learning curve — already most at risk of layoff. “I don’t know where they think we’re going to find all the bad teachers,” she said.

Howard Buck: 360-735-4545 or howard.buck@columbian.com.