Judge Dismisses One HB 7069 Lawsuit

The Broward County lawsuit over HB 7069 and Schools of Hope was dismissed by Judge Cooper in the Leon County Court. No written decision is yet available. Judge Cooper, according to the Miami Herald, ruled that districts did not have the constitutional authority to direct facility funding that is locally generated. Thus, charters could share in locally generated funding. In addition, the law allows charter systems to be their own Local Education Agency which makes them independent from local school boards. Schools of Hope which are charter take overs of low performing public schools were ruled to be outside local district control. The bill also includes a state designated standard charter contract that has no locally inserted provisions. Districts cannot amend the contract to designate local needs be observed. Finally, some changes in local district control of federal funds for disadvantaged students remain.

While Judge Cooper seemed sympathetic to the school districts’ case, he said his court did not have jurisdiction to overturn the law passed by the legislature, even if, as a local observer reported, the law was “stupid”. The expectation is that the case will be appealed to a higher court.

For a brief review of the HB 7069 lawsuits see: How many HB 7069 lawsuits are there?.

CRC Home Stretch on Education Amendment Proposals: Beware!

It looks like there will be two constitutional amendments affecting K12 education. Three previous proposals are grouped into one amendment and another proposal stands alone. Both amendments expand charter schools and lead to greater state control of local schools.

  1. One amendment ties P10 civics education to P 71 the expansion of the authorization of charter schools, and P43 limits of terms of school board members. Schools already require civics education in statute. Expanding the authorization of charter schools beyond school districts is a fight that has been going on in the legislature for several years. This is a local control issue that if successful, would allow a state agency or other designee to authorize charters anywhere. Limiting terms for school board members to eight years would allow more turnover, but it could also lower the level of expertise of boards.

  2. A second amendment P93 would stand on its own on the ballot. This amendment allows innovative or high performing districts to turn themselves into charter districts. They would be exempt from the facility and personnel regulations in the K12 school code that other public schools must follow. The consequences for the creation of charter districts for ‘high performing’ school districts are a mixed blessing. Yes, districts would have flexibility, but issues of funding equity, staffing, and quality of facilities all could become more contentious. Of course there is the irony that most high performing districts are ‘high performing’ because they have more schools whose populations are more affluent. Thus, rural and lower income areas would have more regulation and more expensive facilities etc.

CRC Drops Voucher Proposals for November 2018, Charter districts still there

The Constitutional Revision Commission dropped the two voucher proposals to amend the Florida constitution. Polling by Clearview Research resulted in a 41% favorable response to amendment 4 that would give state funding to private, religious schools. There must be a 60% favorable vote in November to pass. Erika Donalds withdrew her proposal number 45 to fund educational services to private schools.

This decision does not change the current status of Florida tax credit scholarships which are funded by corporate tax rebates.
What’s left?

P43 by Donalds to have a two term limit for school board members
P71 by Donalds changes school board oversight from all schools “within” the district to all schools “established by” the district. This would remove the authorization of charter schools by elected school boards.
P93 by Martinez would allow a school board or the voters to turn an entire district into a charter district. The schools would then be exempt from the K12 school code for facilities and personnel in the same way as charters now are exempt.

Doomsday or Glimmer of Hope?

I heard some things in Tallahassee. One legislator said “If HB7055 becomes law, it is the end of public education as we know it.” Another legislator said: ” I was taken for a ride last year on HB7069; it won’t happen again.” Nevertheless, HB7065 passed in the House today by 66 yeas to 43 nays on the third reading. There is no conforming bill in the Senate; the fate of our schools now depends upon the strategy the Senate uses to consider its bill, SB2508. To become law, the two chambers have to negotiate a common bill. Last night the Senate stripped the House bill of its HB 7055 language. It offered to consider individual proposals one at a time. The League has positions on this list of individual bills.

It’s clear that the House HB 7055 policies are all about privatizing our public schools. The Senate bill SB 2508 is much more supportive of public schools and responsible management. What will happen is tied not to policy, but to the budget process.

The budgets are now renumbered. The House budget is HB5001 and the Senate is SB2500. The House tied its policies to the budget. If their bill does not pass, it can prevent passage of any budget at all. The Senate budget is complex and its impact is not obvious. What happens depends upon understanding the money.

Here’s what I think might be at stake.

  1. The Florida Retirement System. One of the biggest groups supporting the retirement system is teachers. If you are an antigovernment politician, then that big pension system is a target. The fund is self supporting in Florida, but without teachers, it likely will not be.

HB7055 has a measure to decertify unions. Without retirement and health care benefits, there will be more and cheaper charter school teachers available! Almost no charters provide benefits, and it is difficult for them to recruit and retain teachers.

  1. Sales Tax Revenue for Private Schools.. Using sales taxes to fund private school vouchers is unconstitutional. If the House bill becomes law, it will set precedent for giving scholarship funding from sales taxes. It gives $400 to parents to families of kids who failed the FSA English Language Skills test. It is a ploy to set up a scholarship for public school parents to buy services on the private market. It is not about the kids. Those same children would fare much better in the Senate bill which allocates $2000 per child to public schools to provide those services.

The Senate has a much better policy bill, but it has different budget implications. The Senate provides more per student funding ($7,201 vs. $7,142) and slightly more money for student growth. Additional funding comes primarily from the required local effort in local property taxes. There is no millage rate increase, but revenue can once again fluctuate. If property values go up, the revenue to schools increases (and vice versa). The House budget only allows districts to gain income from new home sales, not from increases in property values for all homes and funds fewer new students.

The House version looks like it is lower cost, but it organizes the money differently. For example,
1. Money for the Hope low achieving children and mental health, shows in the Senate budget, but the House reading scholarships based on new car sales do not show in its.
2. The Senate includes money for the Best and Brightest teacher bonuses and the House funds it separately. The Senate includes the extra hour reading requirement but the House does not.
3. The Senate includes a funding compression allocation for districts whose revenue is below the state average but the House does not.

Moreover, facilities funding from PECO dollars derived from taxes on telephone lines etc. will generate $120 million for the 652 charter schools the House favors but only $50 million for the over 4,000 public schools. The allocates $25 million to charters and $75 million to district schools.

After all is said and done, in the Senate FEFP budget, the base allocation from the State general revenue is less than last year by $45.20 per student, and new money for programs comes from local property taxes. Perhaps the Senate can find a little more money from the State so that its share of funding for schools is equal to last year.

The House state base allocation increased this year, but of course it funds its new programs separately. Smoke and mirrors hiding real consequences not only to children, but to the future of our educational system.

We all know that most policy decisions are about who gets the money. This is your money. Who gets it? If ever there is a time to let your voices be heard, this is it. Do you want to set up a system to promote private schools? If not, say so.

The BIG Questions: What Choice Really Means

The Florida House and Senate will negotiate over how school systems can be either publicly or privately run or a combination of the two. They call this ‘district flexibility’, and it raises four BIG questions.

In the House version, HB7055, public schools will be run by privately managed charter districts, if they so choose. In the Senate version, SB2508, school districts will continue to be overseen by elected school boards, but individual public schools may be converted to charters managed by district school boards.

This district flexibility is PHASE TWO of the movement to privatize public schools. The major components include changes in the quality control for buildings and staff, funding for services for struggling students, and control of curriculum. There will not be much more money for schools, but differences in how the two chambers pay for schools are important.

WILL THE LEGISLATURE CHOOSE:

  1. cheap school buildings for some? If the K12 School Code is revoked, as proposed, there will be no standard for school construction. It will be legal for all schools, not just charters or private schools, to be in strip malls, abandoned buildings or in palaces with superb labs and auditoriums for the lucky.

  2. lower qualifications for teachers and principals? In response to teacher shortages, the House revokes union contracts for salaries, benefits, or working conditions. In the Senate version, teachers are district employees, but their pay and hours are determined by principals. To fill vacancies, teacher certification allows individual schools to mentor and qualify teachers. The House bill introduced the term ‘manager’ instead of principal. Both houses allow one principal to supervise more than one school.

  3. schools that choose which students they wish to serve? Proposed House legislation gives funding for struggling students to parents, not schools, and it broadens eligibility for tax credit scholarships. All scholarship programs are consolidated under Step Up for Students, the private entity that now administers private school scholarships. The Senate proposals fund schools to support struggling children, and schools converted to charters must serve the neighborhood children.

  4. religious instruction in all schools? Current bills to allow districts to exceed curriculum standards and introduce religious beliefs and ideological economic theories into schools (SB966). Some charters already blur the distinction between secular and non secular schools. They are located in church facilities, or they advertise ‘Christian or other ethnic values’.

In November 2018, voters will vote on changes to Florida’s constitution to implement PHASE THREE. Will barriers be removed to direct funding of private schools and teaching religion in public schools? This what school choice is all about. Do companies and churches run schools and parents do the best they can to find a school that will accept their children? Do you relax standards in order to save money? The League position is clear; we support free, high quality public schools for all children, and these schools are run by locally elected school boards.

Did Miami-Dade Suggest a Better Choice?

Suppose high performing districts could turn themselves into charter districts. They would be governed by the elected school board and freed from most state regulation for curriculum, facilities, and staffing. The State Curriculum Standards and assessments would be in place, teachers would be certified and be part of the State system, and school facilities would vary according to need.

The suggestion from Superintendent Carvalho is part of the draft Florida Senate bill 2508 now circulating, and an amendment P93 by the Constitutional Revision Commission member, R. Martinez. A different version of the concept was filed in the House: PCB 18-01 Will there be unintended consequences? No doubt! Is it a better direction than privatizing our schools and taking away local control from elected school boards? Yes. Is it better than what we have now with a one size fits all set of regulations? Maybe.

None of this well correct the test driven instruction due to the school grading accountability system. It will not solve the funding problem for school operations, but it might reduce facility cost. Of course, less expensive facilities may also mean less space, quality, and a proliferation of small, inefficient and therefore costly schools. The problems associated with inequity due to housing patterns remain. Problems associated with teacher recruitment are not easily solved if salaries are not competitive and teachers’ expertise is not valued. Districts will have to have the expertise and ability to make good decisions. Nevertheless, it might be a step in the right direction.

There is a difference between the House and Senate versions of this concept. The Senate keeps these charter districts under school board control. The CRC proposal P93 is more like the one in the Senate version. Both bills include many other provisions that deserve careful scrutiny.

At least this year, the legislature is airing these proposals early and getting feedback. They are, however, still tying concepts worth considering to those more controversial and destructive all in the same bill.

Games CRC Plays: It is dark behind doors, not sunny.

The CRC is making its own rules. According to CRC member Erika Donalds, the CRC operates like the legislature; it does not follow the Sunshine law. If they want to speak together secretly, they do so. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who sits on the CRC, stated that she personally does not engage in one-on-one talks with other commissioners.

Politico has taken an interest in the behind the scenes discussions about Erika Donalds proposals to amend the Florida constitution. Procedural issues continue plague the operation of the CRC which can invalidate the CRC proposals. Her proposals would end school board salaries, impose term limits, require appointed superintendents, and promote funding for private schools, and strip charter school authorization authority from local school boards.

Donalds is the Collier County School Board member who helped organize her own school board association, separate from the Florida School Boards Association. The membership of this alternative group has ties to a charter school chain operated by a private religious college in Michigan. She and her husband, Representative Byron Donalds, were founding board members of Mason Classical Academy charter in Collier County. Donalds has filed for a second charter. Shawn Frost, who is part of this group, has announced he will not seek reelection to the Indian River school board. It seems he expects to be appointed to the Florida State Board of Education.

Separation of Church and State Under Siege

Roberto Martinez filed P4 to end the ban on public funding for religious schools. In a 5-1 vote yesterday, the Constitutional Revision Commission sub committee on Declaration of Rights agreed. The provision in question, commonly known as the Blaine amendment, has been in the Florida Constitution for over a 100 years.

According to the Tallahassee Democrat, Martinez says he supports separation of church and state and public schools. He just thinks banning money from religious institutions is wrong.

This argument is as old as our country. The voters will have to decide once again. Florida’s Supreme Court supported the Blaine amendment is 2006. A ballot measure to allow private school funding was defeated in 2008, The voters rejected a subsequent to fund private schools in 2012.

Once again, it is time to stand up to the values in our Florida constitution. They have withstood the test of time. Some variation of this latest attack on the separation of church and state will appear on the November 2018 ballot. Voters once again will have to reinforce the distance between an impartial public school system and individual religious preferences.

The CRC Wrecking Crew

In 1998, the Constitutional Revision Commission strengthened Florida’s education system. Twenty years later, the current CRC is called a wrecking crew in the Orlando Sentinel editorial.

What is at stake?

Martinez proposes to end the separation of church and state. Can you believe this: The Chair of the State Board of Education, Marva Johnson, is proposing to abolish the prohibition to fund private schools with public money. Other CRC members would allow public funds to be used for services in private schools. Even more unbelievable is the proposal by a member of the Collier County school board, Erika Donalds, to allow charters without having school board approval. And then, Martinez would totally get rid of the provision for a uniform system by creating charter school districts.

There’s more. The only hopeful thing is that Florida’s voters have rejected many of these same ideas before, more than once. Voters will have to turn out in droves in November 2018 to say once more that all children must have access to a free, high quality education.

CRC Education Amendments ATTACK K12 Public Schools

The Constitutional Revision Commission members are filing amendments to the Florida Constitution. Four general categories include:

Remove local control of school boards CRC Member Erika Donalds, a pro choice Collier County School Board member, would remove these local options that districts now have by:
1. P43: Requiring term limits for school board members
2. P33: Requiring appointed superintendents
3. P32: Preventing salaries for local and state school board members

Privatization of Public Schools
1. P45 Donalds: Cannot limit the legislature from providing other educational services in addition to the system of free public schools

Remove restriction on Separation of Church and State
1. P59 Johnson: Article IX Section I that prohibits state funds for religious schools would be amended to eliminate restrictions on public funding for educational services at religious entities.
2. P4 Martinez: This ‘Declaration of Rights’ amendment removes prohibition in Article I Section 3 on funding for church, sect, religious denomination or sectarian institution

Expand Charter Schools
P.71 Donalds: Charter Schools Authorization. The amendment gives the legislature free rein to increase or otherwise change current authorization of charter schools to other entities than school districts, municipalities, businesses, colleges/universities

School Operation
P. 10 Gaetz: Require Civics literacy
P. 82 Heuchan: Require schools cannot open before seven days before Labor Day.

State University System
P. 25 Plymale: Establish Community College System
P. 44 Washington: Require minimum vote threshold for tuition and fee increases.
P. 70 Keiser: Tuition and fee waivers for certain members of the military and/or spouse and children
P. 60 Johnson: Bright Futures scholarship and Public Student Assistance Grant funding mandates and qualifications
P. 57 and P. 49, P. 16 Kruppenbacher and Gainey: Death benefits for survivors of first responders etc. that equal tuition and fee costs for post secondary education.

I will provide an analysis of the implications of the PK12 amendments in the weeks ahead.