School Boards Could See Greater State Scrutiny Following Action on Teacher Raises and Vote on Opportunity School District
Most Gold Dome observers predicted that much of the 2017 legislative session would focus around education. Two years ago, Governor Deal created his Education Reform Commission to examine K-12 education, and make recommendations on how to improve it. Originally scheduled to make its recommendations during the 2016 legislative session, the governor agreed to a delay in announcing the results until 2017 so the education funding subcommittee could continue gathering feedback.
News that some local school districts used funding intended to provide 3% raises to teachers for other purposes, and the result of the vote on the governor’s Opportunity School District might well dictate the direction the reform proposal takes in January.
When Governor Deal announced the delay in reporting the results of the Reform Commission during the State of the State address in January, he also announced $300 million in increased K-12 funding, which he hoped would be used to provide a 3% raise for teachers. But, he also warned,
We will distribute this money to your local school system under the existing QBE formula, but it is our intention that your local school system pass the three percent pay raise along to you. If that does not happen, it will make it more difficult next year for the state to grant local systems more flexibility in the expenditure of state education dollars, as recommended by the Education Reform Commission.
We have given local school systems large increases in funding for the past three years and given them the flexibility to decide how to spend it. Based on a survey by the State Department of Education, 94 percent of school systems used those funds to reduce or eliminate furlough days. With the additional funding this year, furloughs should be a thing of the past and teachers should receive that three percent pay raise.
In the end,not all the school districts used the money to fund the 3% raises. The AJC reports the results of a survey by the Department of Education that show only 40% of the state’s school districts passed that money along in the form of raises. Some used the money for one-time bonuses, others eliminated remaining furlough days, and still others used the funds to cover operating expenses. Governor Deal’s spokeswoman had a quick reaction to the news:
Governor Deal has given local school systems large increases in funding for the past three years and given them the flexibility to decide how to spend it. These additional resources, totaling $894 million, were sent to local school systems to restore instructional days, eliminate teacher furloughs and increase teacher salaries.
“Last year, 94 percent of school systems reported eliminating furlough days. With the additional spending this year, furloughs should have been a thing of the past and teachers should have received that 3 percent pay raise,” she added. “Since so many did not, Governor Deal is left with no other option; silo the pay raise, which will mandate teachers receive it.
In light of the austerity cuts to K-12 education brought on by the recession, the administration had given local school boards more flexibility in how to spend state funds. That flexibility may now be ending. How much flexibility the boards have left could depend on the results of the vote on Amendment 1, the Opportunity School District.
Intended to allow the state to bring chronically underperforming schools temporarily under state control in order to improve student outcomes, the OSD proposal has been opposed not only by Democrats and groups such as the American Federation of Teachers, but also by many of the state’s school boards, including some that have no schools in danger of being under the control of the OSD. And as reported by the AJC’s Greg Bluestein, the governor will step up the pressure on local school boards if the measure fails to bass:
I want to see that they would be doing something other than say, ‘We’re protecting our monopoly,’” Deal said. “And that’s what they have – a monopoly. And monopolies, as a general rule, have no competition and see no reason to change. I would expect them to show some evidence that they’re willing to change.
Recent polling shows that the Opportunity School District is opposed by many voters, who fear loss of local control if the measure passes.
Gwinnett County has the state’s largest school district. Its superintendent, J. Alvin Wilbanks, is a member of the governor’s Education Reform Commission. Over the past year, the district has been working on a new compensation model for teachers that is based on performance that is expected to be used as the model for statewide changes. At a recent work session, Wilbanks told the school board to expect details by the end of the year on the new package, which is expected go into effect for the 2017-18 school year. The district is waiting on more information from the Reform Commission. One wonders what changes might be made to the compensation model based on the OSD vote and the lack of follow through on the 3% raises proposed by the governor this year.
About Author
Jon Richards
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Bass ackwards. The Governor made a promise he couldn’t keep and now he’s blaming others. Did those school boards actually do anything wrong by reducing furlough days or paying their bills? From what we see in this story they look like prudent decisions.
As far as a ‘monopoly’ goes: Virtually no one goes into teaching because of the money. They do it because they think they can do it well and make a difference. It usually takes an advanced degree (with the attendant debt that goes with it), it’s very stressful with a high level of personal responsibility required, difficult working conditions (even little time to use the bathroom!), plenty of personal sacrifice, constantly changing conditions and evaluation criteria…
That’s not to say that some don’t get burned out and try to coast and perhaps there needs to be a better way to ‘repurpose’ them. But I want to point out that only 4% of Georgia schools would currently make the list. Of course we should address those schools, but in any organization with hundreds of locations, that’s not too bad of a success rate. After all, over 2500 charter schools have failed since 2001.
This article shows a one-sided attempt to stoke fear and try to cause teachers and Boards to fight each other because of a fear that the OSD amendment will not pass. There are so many wrong things with the statements made it’s hard to know where to start. First, with the 3%. I would first ask the Governor if the intention for the money was to give 3% raises, then why didn’t they simply raise the state salary schedule for teachers? The answer is because that raise would then go into the education funding formula that is in law and tell the State they now owe a higher amount because of the raises, but leaves the austerity reduction (the cut in the formula earnings) in place. This is important because it highlights that all that “new money” they are putting in has been going to reduce the cut in the funding formula that is in law.
Example, based on your student count, your system earns $10 million. The State has not been able to follow the law and pay this amount since 2003, so they add what is called an austerity reduction which is just a negative line below the earnings line … say -$500,000 in this example. If the state increases the state teacher pay scale by 3%, then the formula would say they owe $11 million and the -$500,000 is still out there. So instead, they give systems $250,000 of that $500,000 and say we expect you to give raises to teachers with that restored money so that local systems have to be the bad guy when they can’t afford to do so because all the State is doing is restoring a cut.
Yes, most furloughs are gone, but the formula is funding for a basic education – how about funding that first, then requiring raises to be used with money that is added from that point? School system’s revenues are a function of local revenue as well. Just because money comes in from one source, it doesn’t mean it isn’t being lost from another source. I would ask the Governor, “how much has been added to the cost of health insurance for classified employees?” During this time that they are reducing the cut by putting all this “new” money in, employer’s cost for classified health has gone up significantly. Similar to teacher raises, why classified employees (custodians, nutrition, bus drivers, etc.) you might ask? Because classified employees are not in the State funding formula – only certified (teachers) are, so the entire cost of the increase is on local systems.
School systems are also made up of more than teachers. Some systems may want to provide raises to bus drivers, custodians, nutrition workers, clerical as well. All of a sudden, this “new” money doesn’t stretch as far. Systems may also want to try to provide more strategic supports – such as reduce class sizes. The reason we have flexibility is because of the austerity cuts. One flexibility is class size. Is it okay to reduce that first before giving raises … or must we do the raises first? Now comments like the one from the Governor’s office are trying to divide systems for the purpose of OSD.
So thank you for the $894 million. Only a couple hundred million to go to wipe out the cut and pay the legal funding formula. They are almost there! Then they can provide real new money.
On to OSD. The amendment is a gross violation of Republican principles and local citizen rights. The legislators got greedy. The legislature wants more private charter schools and ultimately vouchers for private schools. What is the most difficult thing for private schools to do? Raise capital for capital expenditures (buildings, equipment). What do school system’s have a lot of? Capital (buildings and equipment). How do we get this capital in the hands of private charters or private schools – take over the school and take the building. This is the greed. Local governments paid for buildings mostly with SPLOST (local taxes). This amendment is one government taking the property of another government – I didn’t think eminent domain allowed for this. If the school is taken over, the way the legislation is written, the district will never get that school building back. And then the local taxpayer still has to pay for the maintenance and renovation of that building with no voice. Next, to determine failing, they are using CCRPI which has changed each year for the past three years and was never meant to be a tool to determine failing or not. We have no idea what score means a school is failing, until this legislation assigned a score based on what we all think of as a failing grade in school. Third, they want to act like there there will be someone to hear parents concerns but to reach the person that can control the people running the school, parents will have to get in touch with the Governor’s appointed superintendent. That will be like trying to get in touch with the Governor himself to handle a parent’s issues. This is where it doesn’t make sense for Republicans who believe that government should be closest to the people and to reduce government, not expand it by adding a whole new area to handle schools taken over. I have not heard a response about how this is closer to the people nor how this is reducing government. Our legislator could not answer anything about this amendment in which he voted in favor. Lastly, the OSD model is using the model from States that are actually doing worse that Georgia.
The most insulting thing about this amendment is the language of the amendment. Like the charter school amendment, the language is skewed. It may as well say, “Would you like the constitution to be amended to reduce the number of puppies killed in a year?” The public should be outraged that ballot questions are not presented in fair language. I would ask people to question the logistics of legislation- many will have no idea what this amendment means and will be led by the tone of the question. At a very basic level, don’t make changing the Constitution easy.
I am disappointed in Governor Deal for bullying. He is basically making statements using words like monopoly to stoke anger in people, and at the same time saying you will pay local school systems if the amendment doesn’t pass. Nothing was fair about the presentation of this amendment, but again, if he doesn’t get his way, watch out – you will lose the flexibility that was given because we cut your funds every year since 2003. The community and home environment is 80% of a student’s ability to succeed. Start threatening crime instead of teachers and local boards of education.
So local school boards, empowered by the GA constitution/code, are somehow “monopolies” in the eyes of the governor? I guess we could also say the following are monopolies:
State legislature
County Board of Commissioners
Governor
(I guess he missed the part in government 101 where we have these things called “elections” to give the people a voice in government.)
What a ridiculous statement. Deal has a nasty side that seems to slip out when he’s under pressure – like when his prized OSD initiative is far behind in the polls, despite all the usual attempts to trick voters.