Tag Archives: pre-k

House Public Education Committee hears hours of testimony on school finance plan, HB 3

On Tuesday, March 12, 2019, the House Public Education Committee heard over 12 hours of testimony from 116 individuals on the House school finance plan, House Bill (HB) 3. Testifiers ranged from elementary school students to superintendents and teacher associations. There were 187 individuals registered, with 131 for the bill, 46 neutral (including ATPE), and 10 against. Public comment was largely positive, with concerns bubbling to the surface on the teacher merit-based-pay portion of the bill, increased inequity between property wealthy and property poor districts, and the integration of the current gifted and talented allotment into base funding.

Every testimonial began with gratitude for the many aspects of the bill that improve school funding. These include reimbursements for real costs associated with administration of SAT/ACT and certifications for career and technical education (CTE) students, a substantial increase to the basic allotment from $5,140/student to $6,030/student, new dual language and dyslexia weights, the extension of CTE funding to middle school students, increases to early childhood through the early reading allotment, and efforts to target funds to schools serving students in concentrated poverty.

The majority of testimony, including that from parents and children, focused on the bill’s proposal to roll the gifted and talented (G/T) allotment into the basic allotment instead. Currently, G/T students are funded at a 0.12 weight, but district enrollment is capped at 5%. Most, if not all, districts enroll the maximum of 5% of students. Therefore, districts receive the maximum funding for G/T students. By rolling G/T funding into the basic allotment, the base level of funding is raised and all districts still get the money and are still statutorily required to provide the G/T program. Testifiers advocating for G/T expressed concern that districts would no longer implement G/T programs to fidelity without the allotment, even with the ability under HB 3 for G/T funding to be 100% stripped should a district opt not to certify that it is providing a G/T program.

The concern with the merit-based teacher pay portion of the bill was mainly voiced by teacher groups such as ATPE, the Texas- American Federation of Teachers, the Texas State Teachers Association, and the Texas Classroom Teachers Association, along with a number of teachers who took time to come to Austin to personally express similar disapproval of the inclusion of merit pay in the bill. Testifiers stated that the bill gives the Commissioner of Education (who is un-elected) too much power, assumes that data exists to evaluate all teachers in every subject area, allows for very subjective and potentially biased student surveys to be used for evaluating and ranking teachers, and does not include factors for teachers’ years of experience. Several witnesses told the committee that teachers deserve an across-the-board pay raise before legislators discuss a state framework for differentiated pay, which is similar to but far more acceptable than traditional notions of merit pay. Another area of concern in HB 3, which ATPE noted in our testimony yesterday, is that the bill complicates state laws regarding the minimum salary schedule – creating a new, separate salary schedule for most teachers while keeping counselors, nurses, and librarians on the minimum salary schedule currently found in law – and would allow any school district to simply opt out of using the state’s minimum salary schedule.

The concern over linking teacher pay to student performance metrics, which most see as little more than paying for STAAR scores, is especially concerning amidst ongoing reporting that STAAR has been shown to be unreliable. This spurred discussion from Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian), who repeatedly argued that the bill does not mandate the use of the STAAR test for the teacher designations and merit-pay outlined in the bill. However, a reading of the bill clearly outlines the criteria for the tests that can be used, as well as the requirement for the commissioner to use comparative state data to create forced rankings of teachers.

ATPE Senior Lobbyist Monty Exter testifying before the House Public Education Committee on March 12, 2019

ATPE Senior Lobbyist Monty Exter testified neutrally on HB 3, echoing many of the same concerns and was able to tease out many of the push-backs from committee members. Exter expressed that although the bill has some very positive qualities in that it manages to provide at least some level of funding increase for almost all districts while also increasing funding for special populations, a nearly herculean task, aspects of HB 3 that promote merit pay tied to testing are not appropriate for stimulating educational improvement. Exter noted for the committee that ATPE members through the member written and adopted legislative program, “oppose the use of student performance, including test scores as the primary measure of a teacher’s effectiveness, as the determining factor for a teacher’s compensation or as the primary rationale for an adverse employment action.” As with other witnesses testifying on behalf of teachers yesterday, ATPE’s testimony included the fact that we are aware of no other common metric shared by districts across the state that the commissioner could use to rank teachers for purposes of the proposed merit pay program other than STAAR test results.

In the end, Exter implored the committee not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, noting that the few parts of the bill educators oppose, including merit pay, are not integral to the functioning of the larger bill; if those parts of the bill were removed, Exter tstified, Texas educators could very likely enthusiastically support HB 3. Watch Exter’s full exchange with the committee here beginning at the 5 hour and 24 minute mark. Exter’s testimony was preceded by ATPE member and former Texas Secondary Teacher of the Year Stephanie Stoebe. ATPE State Vice president Tonja Gray also testified later in the hearing. View ATPE’s written testimony on HB 3 here.

Other education stakeholders focused their testimony in yesterday’s hearing more on concerns surrounding financial equity. While we won’t get into the weeds about tax effort and the guaranteed yield of different tax rates (and thus, golden and copper pennies), the general sentiment expressed was that HB 3 would increase inequity between property wealthy and property poor districts over time. For much more detailed information on this issue, please see testimony provided by the Equity Center and the Center for Public Policy Priorities on HB 3.

In addition to the tax inequity aspect, small and midsize districts and their representatives argued against moving the small and midsize adjustment, which adjusts the basic allotment to a higher amount to account for diseconomies of scale, to an allotment under HB 3. In current law, the adjustment is applied to the basic allotment before additional  funding weights (compensatory education, bilingual education, special education) are applied for various types of students, adding more money. Under HB 3, the adjustment would be applied to the basic allotment just like any other student weight, which advocates argue would reduce overall funding for specific student populations.

Yesterday’s hearing was likely to be the only opportunity for public comment on this version of HB 3 in the House. Once HB 3 is brought up in the House Public Education Committee again, which we expect to happen next week, it will likely be in the form of a committee substitute (a changed version) and the committee is not required to take additional testimony before voting on the bill. Follow ATPE Lobbyists on Twitter @ATPE_AndreaC, @ATPE_MontyE, @ATPE_JenniferM, and @MarkWigginsTX to get up-to-date news on HB 3 as it moves through the legislative process.

House Public Education Committee hears first bills of the 86th session

Today, the House Public Education Committee heard the first education bills of the session. The bills spanned topics including prekindergarten class sizes, educator preparation and training, assessment, and special education. ATPE supported several bills on the agenda, including these:

  • House Bill (HB) 55 (Gonzalez, D-Clint) Limit prekindergarten class-size and class size ratios to align with high-quality standards.
  • HB 108 (Gonzalez, D-Clint) Create a digital portfolio assessment pilot program.
  • HB 109 (Martinez, D-Weslaco) Allow charter schools to have a holiday on Memorial Day.
  • HB 111 (Gonzalez, D-Clint) Create educator training requirements on recognizing the abuse and maltreatment of students with severe cognitive disabilities.
  • HB 116 (Gonzalez, D-Clint) Improve educator preparation and training to better prepare teachers to serve students with disabilities.
  • HB 120 (Gonzalez, D-Clint) Add an extra year of delay to testing for recent immigrants who are learning English.
  • HB 165 (Bernal, D-San Antonio) Increase equity and the ability of special education students to receive high school endorsements.

ATPE Lobbyist Andrea Chevalier testifying before the House Public Education Committee, Feb. 19, 2019

In addition to the bills above, ATPE’s newest lobbyist, Andrea Chevalier, testified in support of HB 102 by Rep. Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio). The bill would improve and fund mentoring programs for teachers. As noted in our testimony, the ability of school districts to access additional funding to pay mentor teachers is a great way of providing differentiated pay that rewards the service and expertise of experienced teachers. Additionally, mentor programs have been shown to improve the effectiveness of beginning teachers, as well as teacher retention.

Other bills on the agenda today, for which ATPE did not take a position, included the following:

  • HB 65 (Johnson, E., D-Dallas)- Would require districts to report information on out-of-school suspensions.
  • HB 128 (Hinojosa, D-Austin)- Would require that districts send the results of student physical assessment to parents.
  • HB 134 (Swanson, R-Spring)- Limits bond elections so that only one project or category of projects can be included within each proposition.
  • HB 187 (Reynolds, D-Missouri City)- Alters the composition of the Fort Bend ISD School Board so that one member is at-large and the rest of the members are elected from single-member districts.

 

ATPE and others testify on school finance commission recommendations

This week, the House Public Education Committee received feedback from various stakeholders regarding recommendations of the Texas Commission on Public School Finance. Tuesday and Wednesday, committee members heard testimony from panels including three former House Public Education Committee chairs, superintendents, trustees, teachers, and representatives of education associations. Rural, suburban, and urban districts were represented, as well as charter and traditional public schools.

The overwhelming majority of testifiers expressed support for the commission’s recommended increase in the spectrum weight and the dual language weight. These would help create equity by funding certain student populations at higher levels. Most witnesses also commended the commission’s recommendation to fund early childhood education, but were concerned with its sustainability and with tying it to third-grade reading scores.

Among the concerns commonly expressed by stakeholders was outcomes-based funding. District leaders said they would like  local flexibility in implementing merit-based, outcomes-based, or performance-based funding mechanisms for their teachers. Apprehension with outcomes-based funding derived from mistrust or lack of confidence in the current assessment system’s ability to accurately capture student learning. In fact, an equal proportion of Tuesday’s discussions seemed to focus on assessment as on school finance. Some leaders expressed that tying funding to tests would reinforce teaching-to-the-test, and some stakeholders suggested that base teacher pay be addressed before additional incentive mechanisms.

Stakeholders representing small and midsize districts (up to 5,000 students) also expressed concern with the commission’s recommendation to move the small and midsize funding adjustment out of formula, which could alter funding to these special student populations, affecting the districts’ ability to meet federal obligations for financial maintenance of effort under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Overall, stakeholders also expressed concerns with any funding changes that were not part of the base formula, given that similar funding approaches in the past have been less reliable. An example cited was Pre-Kindergarten (Pre-K) funding under House Bill (HB) 4 of 2015, which created an optional grant program should districts decide to offer high-quality Pre-K. Another potential funding change discussed this week was the Cost of Education Index (CEI). While some testified that they were uncomfortable with the idea of the CEI being eliminated, Chairman Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood) reiterated his intent for definite removal of the CEI in any school finance overhaul this session.

While this week’s testimony nearly always touched on teacher compensation, an important aspect of teaching beyond pay arose in the conversations: mentoring. A few witnesses expressed that the best first-year investment is a mentor teacher and that having mentor teachers is another way to provide extra compensation. Special education is another topic that came up during the hours of testimony, even though it was not widely broached by the commission last year other than through a discussion of funding for dyslexia. In testimony, several special education advocates suggested revamping the way special education is funded, which is currently done by placement rather than services. Chairman Huberty was favorable to the ideas presented.

Monty Exter

ATPE Senior Lobbyist Monty Exter, was last to testify Wednesday evening. He shared that ATPE supports the commission’s recommended changes to the weights, local flexibility in spending weighted dollars, and increases to the basic allotment. He expressed concerns with outcomes-based funding and suggested an adequate base increase for teachers and others on the education team first. Exter also offered that inputs should be incentivized as well, in a similar way to how high-quality Pre-K was incentivized through the HB 4 grant program. Lastly, Exter testified that teacher quality is related to educator preparation, another topic that cannot be forgotten when discussing increasing teacher effectiveness.

School finance commission considers first round of recommendations

The Texas Commission on Public School Finance met Tuesday morning to discuss recommendations from the working group on outcomes, lead by Todd Williams. Commission Chair Scott Brister opened the meeting by requesting suggestions for how to pay for the various recommendations the commission has received.

Texas Commission on Public School Finance meeting July 10, 2018.

Texas Education Agency (TEA) Chief School Finance Officer Leo Lopez was the first invited witness, and provided an overview of how public education in Texas is funded. Currently, the state pays 36 percent of the total cost of funding schools. Excluding local recapture, the bulk of funding – 51 percent – is carried by local property taxes. Recapture, which is also local funding but was counted separately for the purposes of Lopez’s presentation on Tuesday, amounts for three percent of funding. The remainder comes from federal funding.

According to TEA’s numbers, state funding on a per-student basis has remained flat since 2008. When adjusted for inflation, this represents a decline in actual dollars. In the same time period, the biggest increase in funding has come from local property taxes. Legislative Budget Board (LBB) Assistant Director John McGeady explained that while the LBB and TEA use different calculations to determine state spending, both sets of data show the state’s share of funding has steadily declined over the past decade.

Williams introduced the same recommendations the working group approved last week, which include outcome-based incentives at the 3rd, 8th, and 12th grade levels. The 3rd grade reading gateway would be supplemented by increased funding for schools with high populations of economically disadvantaged and English learner students that could be used to provide full-day prekindergarten. The 8th grade incentives would target reading and Algebra I, and 12th grade would focus on indicators of post-secondary readiness.

The recommendations from the outcomes working group also include a performance pay system that would reward teachers who complete more rigorous educator preparation programs, provide higher pay for educators according to locally-developed, multi-metric performance evaluation programs, and incent administrators to direct the highest performing educators into campuses and grade levels with the greatest need.

State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston), who has argued against increasing school funding, argued fiercely against objective data presented by Williams that indicate Texas will miss its “60×30” goal by two decades years. The goal is to ensure that 60 percent of Texas 25- to 34-year olds obtain a postsecondary degree or certificate by 2030. According to current rates of postsecondary attainment, the state will not reach this goal until 2051. Bettencourt argued businesses rely on net migration into the state, despite the fact that this necessarily reduces the number of high paying jobs available to students educated in Texas.

Williams told the members he would welcome feedback on the recommendations, and suggested more testimony could be taken, specifically from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) regarding 60×30 progress. State Rep. Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) suggested the working group could collect comments and produce a revised draft.

Williams estimated the cost of implementing the recommendations at $1 billion annually, or $2 billion per biennium. This would gradually increase to $2.5 billion annually over a ten-year period, as districts meet stretch goals and additional districts phase in the recommendations. This could ultimately save the state money by higher-paid workers contributing more state taxes, and fewer state resources would be needed for uninsured medical costs and incarceration. The expenditures working group is expected to meet August 9 to work on recommendations. House Public Education Committee Chair Dan Huberty (R-Houston), who leads the expenditures working group, said more than 200 recommendations have been received. The full commission does not plan to meet until September.

Brister said the commission will not hold a vote until the total cost of recommendations can be calculated and until the commission can determine from where the money to pay for them will come.

Working group releases first set of school finance recommendations

The Texas Commission on Public School Finance working group on outcomes met Tuesday in Austin to consider recommendations based on more than 60 hours of testimony heard by the commission since its first meeting in January.

School finance commission working group on outcomes meeting July 3, 2018.

Group leader Todd Williams began the meeting reading from a detailed report that suggested the state should invest more dollars in specific strategies to accelerate reaching the “60×30” goal of ensuring 60 percent of students go onto post-secondary success by the year 2030.

Common themes from testimony included the importance of early intervention, since only 60 percent of students arrive at school kindergarten-ready. The report indicated teachers are the most important in-school factor in student outcomes, and funding should ensure that every teacher candidate has access to high quality educator preparation programs, ensure they stay in the profession and classroom, and ensure they address student challenges as early as possible.

In order to achieve post-secondary achievement, the report suggested funding should ensure graduates do not require remediation in higher education and that achievement of a post-secondary credential is not only expected, but achievable, affordable and supported. In addition, the report suggested systemic incentives, including ensuring that financial incentives are tied to the achievement of our most critical outcomes.

The working group’s formal recommendations encompass three core principles: Ready to learn, ready to teach, and ready to earn. According to the report, funding should include some specific incentives within the formula funding tied to specific goals at critical gates.

The first of these incentive gates is 3rd grade reading, and the working group is recommending providing an additional weight for low income and/or English language learners for pre-K through grade 3. At each district’s discretion, dollars from this 3rd grade reading investment would be sufficient to be used to fund full day pre-K, tutoring interventions, expanded dual language programs, specialized multi-year early childhood professional development, and a longer school year.

The second incentive is funding for every 8th grader who meets the state’s standard in reading and Algebra I. This is expected to help increase college readiness. The third incentive is funding for every high school graduate assessed as college or career ready, who successfully achieves industry certification or enrolls in college or the military. Incentives for rewarding low-income student achievement should be higher in recognition of the greater associated challenges. State Rep. Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) was emphatic that incentives should not further increase inequity in the school funding system.

The fourth incentive is to provide the optional ability for districts to implement multi-measure evaluation systems and fund higher teacher distinction levels to attract and retain high-quality teachers. The working group noted the issues with current salary levels in recruiting and retaining teachers, and expressed the goal that districts be able to pay top-quality teachers more. Melissa Martin, the only teacher on the commission, said she’s torn over performance pay. Martin voiced concern that evaluations are property constructed and not totally subjective, which could introduce campus politics into the process.

The working group included the following additional recommendations:

  • Adjust compensatory education funding (currently $3.9 billion annually) in recognition that “free and reduced lunch” percentages are a very simplistic measure and do not adequately reflect the varying levels of poverty that exist throughout the state.
  • Strongly consider eliminating the five end-of-course (“EOC”) STAAR assessments and replacing with either SAT or ACT assessments that can measure growth based on a pre-SAT/ACT assessment given in 9th grade vs. a SAT/ACT assessment given in the 11th grade.
  • For districts choosing to implement a full day Pre-K program, consider crediting the appropriate full-day attendance for purposes of funding within the Foundation School Program.
  • TEA financially incent dual language strategies and disallow ELL pullout strategies as an accepted approach toward ELL instruction for larger districts exceeding 5,000 students (this subset of districts educates roughly 80% of all Texas students).
  • Align the current CTE weight of 1.35 (equivalent to $2.2 billion annually) toward CTE programs of study that are vigorously tied to the attainment of living wage credentials aligned with current workforce need and/or which provide students with critical financial literacy skills.
  • Amend legislation to require that failing ISD elementary and middle school campuses may be reconstituted after three years with an ACE-like school reconstitution plan (where better educators have been purposely placed at the struggling campus) with the state providing matching funds to reduce district costs.
  • To reduce prison recidivism and its associated costs to the state, TEA should amend the accountability system to incent school districts to help formerly incarcerated individuals receive their high school diploma or GED.
  • State funding should target professional development training towards schools/districts willing to launch blended learning and personalized learning pilots that help students matriculate faster than their peers if necessary, providing net savings in the long run to the state due to paying for less seat time.
  • Schools should be incentivized by the academic accountability system by creating a separate post-secondary readiness academic distinction. In addition, additional state funding should be awarded if the high school achieves the post-secondary readiness academic distinction.

The working group also expressed support for researching the costs associated with providing all-day pre-K for teachers’ children. The report concludes, “For us to succeed requires very substantive, immediate action on the part of the state (emphasis in original document) – we simply cannot “tweak” our K-12 system to meet this critical objective. Only by making strategic, impactful investments above current levels in the key areas noted, and implementing the innovative structural formula changes that are necessary, can we ensure Texas remains a thriving economy that all of its citizens can participate in.”

The recommendations carry an estimated $1 billion annual price tag, which would average out to about $200 per student and a 4 percent increase in the current basic allotment – still below 2008 inflation adjusted funding levels. This would gradually increase to $2.5 billion annually by 2030, which would average out to $450 per student, which would only be achieved if all districts implement performance pay programs. According to the report, this would still place Texas in the lowest quartile of per-student spending compared to other states.

The report argues these measures could pay for themselves by creating up to $4 billion in incremental potential yearly earnings and up to $250 million in additional state sales taxes for each yearly graduating cohort. Better-prepared graduates will earn more money and pay more in taxes. The report suggests success could also reduce growth in the approximate $12 billion the state spends each year in uninsured medical costs and incarceration.

The report, as amended, was approved with a unanimous vote of the five working group members. You can read all of the recommendations in the full draft report from the outcomes working group here, however some of the recommendations were altered or struck in Tuesday’s meeting. This article contains the most up-to-date versions of the recommendations. The full commission meets July 10.

School finance commission touches on early childhood, funding

The Texas Commission on Public School Finance met Thursday morning in Austin to discuss a lengthy agenda covering early childhood education, weights and allotments, and the permanent school fund.

The hearing began with testimony by early childhood education advocates regarding the well-documented benefits of pre-K, including increased kindergarten readiness, improved third grade reading levels, better long-term student performance and fewer behavioral issues. Alexandra Hale with Good Reason Houston suggested assigning more veteran teachers to early childhood education and allowing districts to count the cost of providing full-day pre-K against recapture.

Texas Commission on Public School Finance meeting May 3, 2018.

Commission Chair Scott Brister suggested any investment in early childhood education would have to come at the expense of any potential increase to teacher salaries, and attempted to goad witnesses into arguing against teacher pay raises. Expanding pre-K and paying educators a professional salary are not mutually exclusive goals, and witnesses correctly pointed out that additional funding is needed across the board.

Former U.S. Undersecretary of Education Linus Wright suggested eliminating Grade 12 in order to spend more money on pre-K for three- and four-year olds. Wright contended that the senior year serves no purpose, and 11th graders are equally capable of going to college. It’s important to note many colleges already complain that Texas high school students arrive at the post-secondary level ill-prepared and in need of remediation. Wright also suggested holding elementary teachers to more rigid certification requirements and treating educators as professionals.

Texas Education Agency (TEA) Chief School Finance Officer Leo Lopez next walked the commission through the list of categories that receive weighted funding under the current school finance formula. These include special education, compensatory education, bilingual education, career and technical, gifted and talented, public education grants (PEG) and the high school allotment. In fiscal year 2018, Texas will spend over $10.2 billion, or 28 percent, of total Tier I funds of $37.1 billion on weighted student funding allotments. Compensatory education receives the greatest share of weighted funding, followed by special education and career and technical.

In fiscal year 2018, the total state special education allotment is estimated at over $3 billion. This allotment is distributed according to subordinate weighted funding calculations for different instructional settings. The compensatory education allotment for fiscal year 2018 is estimated at over $4 billion. This primarily consists of funding for economically disadvantaged students weighted at .20, but also includes pregnancy services weighted at 2.41. Compensatory education spending is primarily calculated based on the number of students eligible for the federal free and reduced lunch program. The bilingual allotment for fiscal year 2018 totaled just over $505 million, and covers instructional materials and stipends for teachers.

After a lunch break, the commission returned to hear testimony regarding the Permanent School Fund (PSF) from outgoing State Board of Education (SBOE) Member David Bradley (R-Beaumont), who chairs the SBOE Committee on School Finance/Permanent School Fund, and TEA Chief Investment Officer Holland Timmins.

The commission is scheduled to meet again June 5, when it hopes to hear from superintendents and principals regarding costly or unfunded mandates. The working group on expenditures is scheduled to meet Friday morning.

Graduation committees advance in House hearing

The House Public Education Committee met Tuesday morning to consider a large agenda of Senate bills as the session winds down. The committee also approved the following bills Tuesday evening:

  • CSSB 463, which was heard earlier in the day. The bill would extend individual graduation committees (IGCs) through 2019.
  • SB 436, the Senate companion to HB 4226, which would require meetings of the Special Education Continuing Advisory Committee to be conducted in compliance with open meetings laws.
  • CSSB 529, the Senate companion to HB 2209, which would incorporate “universal design for learning” into the required training for all classroom teachers.
  • SB 585, the Senate companion to HB 545, which would require principals to allow “patriotic societies” such as Boy Scouts to speak to students about membership at the beginning of the school year.
  • SB 748, the Senate companion to HB 4027, which would add additional guidelines to the transition plan for special education students preparing to leave the public school system.
  • CSSB 1481, the Senate companion to HB 4140, which would rename the instructional materials allotment (IMA) the “instructional materials and technology allotment” and require districts to consider “open education resources” before purchasing instructional materials.
  • SB 1942, the Senate companion to HB 1692, which would allow a licensed handgun owner to store a firearm in a vehicle parked in the parking lot of a public school, open-enrollment charter school or private school. State Reps. Alma Allen (D-Houston) and Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont) voted against the bill.
  • SB 2080, the Senate companion to HB 69, which would require each school district and open-enrollment charter school to include in the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) report the number of children with disabilities residing in a residential facility who are required to be tracked by the Residential Facility Monitoring (RFM) System and are receiving educational services from the district or school.

The meeting began with SB 1566 by state Sen. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham), which would hand broad powers to local school boards to compel the testimony of district officials and obtain district documents. It would also require the Texas Education Agency (TEA) develop a website for boards to review campus and district academic achievement data.

House Public Education Committee meeting May 16, 2017.

House Public Education Committee meeting May 16, 2017.

SB 2131 by state Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas) would add requirements to counseling regarding postsecondary education, encouraging a focus on dual credit programs. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 1294 by state Sen. Dawn Buckingham (R-Lakeway) would prohibit “exclusive consultation,” ensuring that educators on campus-level advisory committees do not all belong to a single professional association. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 1660 by Sen. Taylor would allow districts to choose between using either minutes or days to calculate operation. According to the fiscal note, SB 1660 could cost the state $1.7 million through the biennium ending August 31, 2019.

SB 195 by state Sen. Sylvia Garcia (D-Houston) would allow additional transportation allotment funding to districts with children living within the two mile zone who are at a high risk of violence if they walk to school. In the fiscal note, the Legislative Budget Board indicated that there is insufficient data regarding the number of students who are at risk of violence to be able to calculate a fiscal impact. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 1854 by state Sen. Carlos Uresti (D-San Antonio) would require district-level committees to review paperwork requirements annually and recommend to the board of trustees instructional tasks that can be transferred to non-instructional staff. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 384 by state Sen. Konni Burton (R-Colleyville) would give the State Board of Education (SBOE) flexibility in scheduling end-of-course exams to avoid conflicts with AP/IB national tests.

SB 1883 by Sen. Campbell would modify the approval process for charter applicants and the review of charter operators. ATPE opposes the bill because the removal of elected officials from the charter school process is irresponsible. Adding unnecessary new appeal and review opportunities for charters only creates administrative bloat.

SB 1005 by state Sen. Donna Campbell (R-New Braunfels) would allow the use of the SAT or the ACT as a secondary exit-level assessment instrument to allow certain public school students to receive a high school diploma. The fiscal note estimates an annual cost of $2 million per year.

SB 1839 by state Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola) would create a certification for early childhood through grade three, and would grant the commissioner authority to set reciprocity rules regarding the ability of teachers from outside the state to obtain a certificate in Texas. ATPE believes that the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC), as the official state body charged with the oversight of educator standards, is the more appropriate authority to set these rules.

SB 2270 by Sen. Lucio would create a pilot program in ESC Region 1 to provide additional pre-K funding for low-income students.

SB 1784 by Sen. Taylor would encourage the use of “open-source instructional materials.”

SB 2188 by Sen. Taylor would specify that a student who is 18 or older in an off home campus instructional arrangement is a full-time student if they receive 20 hours of contact a week. Part-time would be defined as between 10 and 20 contact hours per week. According to the fiscal note, SB 2188 would cost roughly $7 million through the next biennium. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 463 by state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo) would extend individual graduation committees (IGCs) to 2019 and order the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to compile a report tracking the progress of IGC graduates. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 2039 by state Sen. Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo) would develop instructional modules and training for public schools on the prevention of sexual abuse and sex trafficking. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 1483 by Sen. Taylor would establish a grant program to implement a technology lending program to provide students with electronic instructional materials. The program would be funded through instructional materials fund. The fiscal note anticipates no additional cost, but indicated the commissioner could use up to $25 million of existing funds from the instructional materials fund each biennium.

SB 1398 by Sen. Lucio makes lots of clarifying and limiting changes to the classroom video camera law. Among them, the bill would require requests in writing and only require equipment in classrooms or settings in which the child is in regular attendance or to which the staff member is assigned.

SB 1122 by state Sen. Donald Huffines (R-Dallas) would create a mechanism to abolish Dallas County Schools, one of two remaining county school districts in the state, which primarily provides transportation services to multiple independent school districts in the Dallas area.

SB 1886 by state Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston) would create an office of the inspector general at TEA appointed by the commissioner to prevent and detect criminal activity in districts, charter schools, and education service centers (ESCs). The bill would allow the new TEA inspector general to issue subpoenas in order to secure evidence.

SB 490 by state Sen. Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville) would require a report on the number of school counselors at each campus. ATPE supports this bill.

SB 1484 by Sen. Taylor would create a web portal and instructional materials repository to assist schools in selecting open education resources. The bill provides for a third party to provide independent analysis regarding TEKS alignment. According to the fiscal note, SB 1484 would not require additional state funding, but would result in an additional cost of $1.85 million in fiscal year 2018 and $450,000 in subsequent years that would be paid from existing instructional materials funding.

SB 1658 by Sen. Taylor would make changes to laws regarding the ownership, sale, lease, and disposition of property and management of assets of an open-enrollment charter school.

SB 2078 by Sen. Taylor would require TEA develop a model multi-hazard emergency operations plan and create a cycle of review. The fiscal note anticipates a fiscal impact of roughly $215,000 per year.

SB 2144 by Sen. Taylor would create a commission to recommend improvements to the public school finance system. ATPE supports this bill.

House committee advances A-F improvements

The House Public Education Committee met Tuesday to hear a number of bills, including those dealing with special education, and to advance a key piece of legislation relating to accountability.

House Public Education Committee meeting April 4, 2017.

House Public Education Committee meeting April 4, 2017.

During a break in testimony Tuesday afternoon, Chairman Dan Huberty (R-Houston) introduced a committee substitute to HB 22, which would modify the “A through F” accountability system. As filed, the bill would collapse the five domains down to three and eliminate the overall, or “summative,” rating for districts and schools.

Chairman Huberty explained the committee substitute would clarify that indicators must be based on disaggregated information and include indicators reflecting access to resources, size and socioeconomics. The substitute would also incorporate policies advocated by ATPE, including a requirement that stakeholders, including teachers, should be involved in the process. ATPE has also advocated for restricting the use of standardized test results and other value-added measures (VAM) for the purposes of evaluating educator performance. The substitute would cap VAM at 25 percent of the educator performance score.

The committee unanimously approved HB 22, along with the following bills:

  • HB 481, which would prohibit TEA from collecting over-allocated state funds after seven years if they resulted from statutory changes.
  • HB 852, which would remove the cap on the number of individuals who can enroll in the adult high school and industry certification charter school pilot program.
  • HB 972, which would make it more difficult for districts to assign students to an uncertified teacher.
  • HB 1560, which would remove an obsolete reference regarding open-enrollment charter schools from the statute outlining the powers of the State Board of Education (SBOE).
  • HB 2611, which would allow districts to list property with a realtor using a multiple-listing service for 30 days.
  • HB 2649, which would require the governing bodies of charter schools to hold open meetings in the county in which the school is located and subject to the same requirements as regular government bodies.
  • HB 3722, which would modify the funding formula for districts to which an academically unacceptable school district is annexed.
  • HB 1669, which would allow the Texas Education Agency (TEA) commissioner to charge legal fees to parents who the commissioner deems have filed a “frivolous” lawsuit.

Also of note, the committee considered HB 713 by state Rep. Gene Wu (D-Houston), which would end the de facto “cap” on special education enrollment unveiled by the Houston Chronicle. Specifically, it would prohibit any performance indicator based on the total number or percentage of students enrolled in special education. As the Chronicle reported, an arbitrary 8.5 percent target monitored by TEA resulted in schools inappropriately denying special education services to thousands of children. Although TEA indicated that it will no longer use this information as a performance indicator, Rep. Wu explained HB 713 would prevent the agency from resuming the practice in the future. ATPE supports this bill.

The hearing began Tuesday morning with HB 1886 by state Rep. Rick Miller (R-Sugar Land), which would specify that appropriate dyslexia screening or testing should be done upon enrollment in kindergarten and at the end of first grade. It would require the TEA designate a dyslexia specialist to provide districts with support and resources, and identify both in-person and online training opportunities. According to the fiscal note, the bill would likely require TEA hire an additional full-time equivalent at a cost of roughly $107,000 per year.

HB 2205 by state Rep. John Kuempel (R-Seguin) would require school employees to report suspected cases of child abuse or neglect to local law enforcement, as well as the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS). Kuempel argued that too much time may pass between the time a report is filed and DFPS notifies law enforcement of a potentially dangerous situation. In some cases, DFPS has waited up to 72 hours before notifying police.

ATPE lobbyist Mark Wiggins testified neutrally on the bill. Highlighting the paramount importance of child safety both to educators and police, Wiggins pointed out that the current law orders DFPS to immediately inform local law enforcement. It’s hard to justify calling 72 hours “immediate,” as required by law. Before duplicating efforts, ATPE suggested that addressing the issue within DFPS may be the correct starting point for ensuring that current law is followed and no children are left in potentially dangerous situations.

HB 743 by state Rep. Jessica Farrar (D-Houston) would allow a social worker to provide services to students and families in a school district, collaborating with school administrators in order to enhance students’ learning environments. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 1720 by state Rep. Larry Phillips (R-Sherman) would require schools to provide parental notice if a child is found with lice. Furthermore, school officials would be required to notify the parents of every child in the same classroom as a student found with lice. The bill specifies that the child’s identity would be held confidential and not revealed to other parents.

ATPE lobbyist Mark Wiggins testified neutrally on HB 1720, noting that some teachers have expressed frustration that some school districts prohibit teachers from notifying other parents when a child is found with lice, resulting in recurring outbreaks. ATPE suggested the bill could be improved by granting individual teachers the right to notify other parents if they determine such action is appropriate.

HB 1556 by state Rep. Mary González (D-El Paso) would require training for foster parents of a child with disabilities before making educational decisions on the child’s behalf. The bill would separate the legal definitions of foster parents and surrogate parents for the purposes of educational decision making. Social workers testified that oftentimes, the law is unclear as to who makes the educational decisions for foster children in certain situations. According to the fiscal note, local districts could find it necessary to invest roughly $230,000 to develop training and $25,000 in subsequent years to maintain and update the training.

HB 1076 by state Rep. Tom Oliverson (R-Cypress) would revisit the timing of mandatory spinal screenings. While current law requires screenings in grades 6 and 9, HB 1076 would instead order the executive commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) to designate the appropriate ages for screening based on the latest scientific research.

HB 1583 by state Rep. Philip Cortez (D-San Antonio) would extend epinephrine auto-injector regulations, privileges, grant eligibility and immunity from liability to private schools. The bill would also add private school nurses to the list of positions eligible to serve on the epinephrine auto-injector advisory council.

HB 2395 by state Rep. Nicole Collier (D-Fort Worth) would order each district and charter to test their water for lead using a third-party testing service. If too much lead is found, the bill would require schools to provide safe water until lead levels are returned to acceptable parameters. According to the fiscal note, the Texas Association of School Business Officials (TASBO) estimated the cost of lead testing to be between $2,000 and $3,000 per building. TEA estimated the statewide cost at approximately $22 million per year, not including remediation.

HB 2130 by state Rep. Kevin Roberts (R-Houston) would order a study on the impact of the statewide assessment program on students in special education. The study would be required to address whether the administration of alternate assessments complies with ESSA and whether state-required assessments provide accurate and helpful information. Many disability advocates argued that current assessments aren’t necessarily appropriate for children with some disabilities. According to the fiscal note, the study would cost the state approximately $230,000. TEA staff testified the study could be paid for out of federal funds. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 1342 by state Rep. Tan Parker (R-Flower Mound) would require elementary and high school students to receive mandatory annual sex abuse training “to promote self-protection, prevent sexual abuse of children, and reduce child pregnancy.” Rep. Parker cited alarming statistics concerning sexual abuse of children, arguing children should be trained how to identify and handle assault.

HB 1033 by state Rep. DeWayne Burns (R-Cleburne) would require the TEA to petition for a waiver of the annual alternative assessment of students with significant cognitive disabilities required under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Rep. Burns suggested that individual admission, review and dismissal (ARD) committees should be empowered to determine which tests, if any, are appropriate. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 23 by Chairman Huberty would create a five-year grant program to provide money for districts and charters that provide innovative services to students with autism.  The total number of eligible school programs would be capped at ten, giving priority to collaborations between multiple districts and charters. Funds would be capped at $20 million total, and $1 million for each individual program. According to the fiscal note, HB would cost the state $258,000 through 2019 and $10.1 million each following year. Chairman Huberty argued the pilot program would help drive innovation in a much-needed area of education. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 2623 by state Rep. Alma Allen (D-Houston) would require schools to create a personalized transition program for students returning after missing 30 instructional days or more because of placement in a juvenile center or hospital care. According to the fiscal note, districts may find it necessary to hire an additional counselor at an average annual salary of $63,000. Rep. Allen explained this is needed to help ensure that students who have been away from a public education setting for an extended period are able to be successfully reintegrated. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 194 by Vice-Chairman Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) would require the State Board of Education (SBOE) to create a special education endorsement. Vice-Chairman Bernal suggested the bill would rectify an oversight that has resulted in some special education students being unable to earn the endorsements needed to graduate.

HB 3439 by state Rep. Linda Koop (R-Dallas) would allow school districts to contract with a charter to operate a district campus and share teachers, facilities or resources. Such schools would be entitled to the greater of the funding per weighted average daily attendance (WADA) entitled to the district or the charter. Although the fiscal note projects no state expense through 2019, the program would cost the state $33.3 million in 2020, $44.4 million in 2021 and $55.5 million in 2022.

ATPE lobbyist Mark Wiggins testified against HB 3439, pointing out concerns regarding students and educators. Even though students in each attendance zone would be given preference, the new charter campus would still be allowed to cap enrollment and potentially exclude students who would otherwise be entitled to go to that school. Furthermore, the legislation is unclear as to whether district teachers could be transferred to the charter and lose the rights and protections of district employees.

The bill would also allow low-performing charters to take over campus management. Currently, charters rated “C” or “D” on the “A through F” accountability system could participate, and as a result, would benefit from a one-year pause in their accountability ratings. This provides an incentive for poorly-performing charters to partner with poorly-performing districts in order to enjoy an accountability holiday. ATPE suggests confining participation to charters with “A” or “B” ratings.

HB 2442 by state Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian) would change “minutes of instruction” to “minutes of operation” for the purposes of determining the length of each school day. The TEA commissioner would determine how many minutes of operation are equivalent to a day of instruction. Instruction time would include recess and meals. The bill would also repeal the minimum length of the school day.

ATPE lobbyist Monty Exter testified in support of HB 2442, pointing out that the bill helps clarify the length of half-day pre-kindergarten for funding purposes.

HB 3157 by state Rep. Dennis Bonnen (R-Angleton) would modify eye exam rules to allow students to be screened using photoscreening. Advocates argued photoscreening is a more accurate and efficient method for detecting eye problems than eye charts, but school policies don’t always allow them.

Before concluding, Chairman Huberty suggested there could be a formal meeting later this week in order to advance additional bills pending in the committee.

School finance bill on its way to full House

The House Public Education Committee convened Tuesday morning with a focus on legislation concerning charters. At the outset, Chairman Dan Huberty (R-Houston) vowed to advance House leadership’s priority school finance bill, HB 21. Members approved the bill during a brief break Tuesday morning by a vote of 10-1.

HPE 03-28-17

Huberty hearkened back to his days as a school board member to explain his longstanding goal of finding a grand fix for the state’s troubled school finance system. The chair noted, “While we’re not there, this is a good first step.”

Casting the lone vote against the committee substitute to HB 21, state Rep. Morgan Meyer (R-Dallas) noted HB 21 increases recapture payments by Highland Park ISD. According to model runs produced by the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), Highland Park ISD would lose $1.6 million in fiscal year 2018, worth $80 per student weighted average daily attendance (WADA).

HB 21 now heads to Calendars, where it will be scheduled for debate on the House floor. With the exception of state Rep. Harold Dutton casting a vote of “present” on HB 1291, the committee unanimously approved the following bills heard previously:

  • HB 1291, which would add a course on “American principles” to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS).
  • HB 657, which would allow ARD committees to advance a student in a special education program after a single exam.
  • HB 1469, which would allow charter schools to hire teachers without a baccalaureate degree for non-core CTE courses.
  • HB 2263, which would shrink the role of campus intervention teams.
  • HB 789, which would allow Highland Park ISD to raise acceleration exam cut scores.
  • HB 1731, which excludes students leaving a residential facility from dropout rate calculations.
  • HB 3075, which excludes students in juvenile facilities from charter school dropout rate calculations.

The first new bill heard was HB 1669 by Rep. Tracy King (D-Batesville), which would allow the Texas Education Agency (TEA) commissioner to charge legal fees to parents who the commissioner deems have filed a “frivolous” lawsuit. It would add language to the law regarding complaints that protects school districts from complaints concerning a student’s participation in an extracurricular activity that doesn’t involve a violation of parental rights.

HB 2611 by Rep. Gary VanDeaver (R-New Boston) would allow districts to list property with a realtor using a multiple-listing service for 30 days. VanDeaver argued the flexibility would allow districts to reach more potential buyers, and he noted that cities and counties are already allowed to do this.

HB 2051 by Chairman Huberty would raise the new instructional facilities allotment (NIFA) to $1,000 from $250. Huberty introduced a committee substitute that would allow the funds to go toward remodeling of facilities. Fast-growth districts and charters argue the funding is needed to keep up with the growing need for new instructional facilities. The allotment is funded off of a set number, and HB 2051 would not increase the total available in the fund. For that reason, HB 2051 has no fiscal note.

Similar to the committee substitute for HB 2051, HB 1081 by Rep. Diana Arévalo (D-San Antonio) would add renovated or repurposed facilities and leased facilities to the New Instructional Facility Allotment (NIFA) under the FSP. The bill makes no change to the amount of the allotment. ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter testified neutrally on the bill. While ATPE supports the ability to use NIFA dollars for renovation and repurposing of buildings, Exter raised concern with the lease language of HB 1081 and allowing state dollars to pay for renovations to facilities that districts will not actually own.

HB 481 by Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian) would prohibit TEA from collecting over-allocated state funds after seven years if they resulted from statutory changes.

HB 3722 by Rep. King would modify the funding formula for districts to which an academically unacceptable school district is annexed. Under HB 3722, TEA would be able to provide additional funding by allowing such districts to make use of the local fund assignment (LFA) adjustment for the annexed district.

HB 1039 by Rep. Mary González (D-El Paso) would change the funding calculation for open-enrollment charter schools from a calculation based on the state average adjustment and tax effort to the lesser of the state average adjustment and tax effort or that of the school district in which the charter’s largest campus is located. González argued that the bill is needed to reduce funding advantages for certain charter schools and bring funding more in line with local ISDs, with the goal of returning charter schools to the original mission of identifying innovative education practices. According to the fiscal note, HB 1039 would save $161 million in state funds over the next two years, which González suggested could be returned to school districts.

HB 2649 by Rep. Giovanni Capriglione (R-Southlake) would require the governing bodies of charter schools to hold open meetings in the county in which the school is located and subject to the same requirements as regular government bodies. The bill would require charters to broadcast their governing meetings over the internet and provide archived audio/video recordings online. Capriglione argued the bill closes a loophole that allows charters to avoid open meetings laws. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 2298 by Rep. Tomas Uresti (D-San Antonio) would prohibit anyone associated with a charter school from serving on a local school board or the State Board of Education (SBOE). The prohibition would apply to an employee, officer, or member of a governing body of a charter school, as well as anyone who lobbies on a charter school’s behalf or has a business interest in a charter school. Uresti argued the rule is needed to prevent a board member’s financial interest in a charter school from creating a conflict of interest with the member’s responsibility to students. ATPE supports this bill.

HB 1059 by Rep. Jim Murphy (R-Houston) would allow for the reattachment of property that has been detached from one district and annexed to another for the purposes of meeting the equalized wealth level. Reattachment can occur if the original district’s wealth per student drops $10,000 or more below the equalized wealth level that applies to maintenance and operation tax effort. Houston ISD faces the detachment of property worth $17.4 billion in order to meet the equalized wealth level after the district decided not to make its first recapture payment. A majority of the board is reported to support an upcoming “second-chance” election to authorize the recapture payment in order to avoid detachment.

Rep. VanDeaver pointed out concerns regarding the effects of reattachment on districts to which property had been annexed. If a district were to issue bonds based on property annexed from another district, then later lost that property through reattachment, taxes on property remaining within that district would necessarily increase.

HB 1023 by Rep. Ron Simmons (R-Carrollton) would allow the TEA commissioner to grant more than one charter for an open-enrollment charter school to a charter holder if the additional charter is for an open-enrollment charter school that serves a distinct purpose or student population. This would allow a charter school operator to be granted an additional charter for programs such as a virtual open-enrollment charter school or an open-enrollment charter school for at-risk students. Current law restricts charter holders to a single charter for an open-enrollment charter school. Rep. Simmons noted there is plenty of room under the charter cap, which is scheduled to be set at 305 charters beginning September 1, 2019. Opponents of the bill voiced concerns regarding the ability of charter holders to skirt accountability through the use of multiple charters. According to the fiscal note, HB 1023 would cost the state roughly $20.7 million through 2019.

HB 2340 by Chairman Huberty would require school districts to maintain a minimum balance of undesignated funds that is no less than the district’s operating expenses for 90 days. The chairman explained the combined amount of money in undesignated school district fund balances across the state has grown to more than $20 billion and continues to increase. HB 2340 aims to encourage districts to spend down their fund balances by defining the balance in statute and outlining a list of acceptable uses for undesignated funds, such as paying off debt. Some indicated concern that cash-strapped Chapter 41 districts currently without a fund balance could face a problem building one up. Chairman Huberty acknowledged that some districts could have legitimate cash flow concerns, and pledged to continue the dialogue with stakeholders.

HB 852 by Rep. Tan Parker (R-Flower Mound) would remove the cap on the number of individuals who can enroll in the adult high school and industry certification charter school pilot program. The current cap limits the program to 150 individuals. According to Rep. VanDeaver, the bill directly affects the Goodwill Excel Center in Austin, which has graduated more than 205 students who would not otherwise have been able to obtain a high school diploma. After emotional testimony submitted by two adult students, a representative from the center testified the school would like to expand the program to additional locations in order to serve more adult students.

HB 171 by Rep. Dutton would require all school districts to lease or sell unused or underused facilities to charter schools. Current statute requires districts to allow charters an opportunity to purchase or lease underutilized facilities, but there is no requirement as outlined in Dutton’s bill. The bill would also require the TEA commissioner to produce a list each year of eligible facilities and post it on the agency website. Dutton said the bill’s committee substitute removes the requirement on districts and allows districts to determine what constitutes “unused” or “underutilized” facilities, which many stakeholders found objectionable. ATPE opposes this bill.

HB 2337 by Rep. Dutton would entitle open-enrollment charter schools to facilities funding equal to the number of students in average daily attendance (ADA) multiplied by the guaranteed level of state and local per-student funds provided to school districts, resulting in an additional $170 per pupil. According to the fiscal note, HB 2337 would cost the state $411 million over the next biennium in Foundation School Program (FSP) funds that would no longer be available to traditional public schools. Dutton argued that charter schools face a structural disadvantage when it comes to facilities funding, and announced that the committee substitute would reduce the program cost to $100 million. Opponents pointed out that traditional public schools also face funding challenges that HB 2337 would make worse. For example, 80 percent of the state’s enrollment growth is occurring in less than 100 school districts. Yet these fast-growth traditional public schools do not receive additional facilities funding from the state. ATPE opposes this bill.

HB 467 by Rep. Murphy would adjust the language regarding the capacity available to charter holders under the bond guarantee program to back bonds with the Permanent School Fund (PSF). It removes language that limits the calculation to capacity available after subtracting the total amount of outstanding guaranteed bonds. Murphy introduced a committee substitute that would move the distribution of funds to a period of five years instead of one year, increase by 50 percent the contributions charters make to the charter reserve fund and expand the TEA commissioner’s discretionary oversight to deny access. The bill would have the effect of increasing the amount available to charters to guarantee bonds using the PSF, which would increase access to better interest rates.

HB 1269 by Rep. Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) would allow a charter school to be eligible for supplemental funding if its students perform better than the state average college readiness standard as measured by test performance. The supplemental funding would be capped by the maximum amount received by nearby districts. Participating charters would be prohibited from expelling students in most cases and would be required to enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the local juvenile justice board to operate a juvenile justice alternative education program on behalf of the charter. Participating charters would also be allowed to contract with a local school board to operate a district campus, which would be immune to action by the commissioner against a failing campus for the first three years. The bill would also expand the scope of reporting for new charter schools to include superintendents, districts, and legislators within a three mile radius of proposed campus locations. Opponents pointed out that HB 1269 would increase facilities funding for charters without addressing charters’ existing advantage in maintenance and operation (M&O) funding provided by the state. According to the fiscal note, HB 1269 would cost the state $450 million through 2019. ATPE opposes this bill.

HB 480 by state Rep. Cindy Burkett (R-Sunnyvale) would allow the TEA commissioner to grant a charter for prekindergarten-only programs. These programs would be exempt from the annual charter cap. The cap limit beginning September 1, 2017, is 270 charters. According to the fiscal note, the cost of providing half-day pre-K to an additional 5,000 students would cost the state roughly $39.7 million over the next two years. TEA staff explained many existing private pre-K providers would likely opt to become charters instead.

ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter testified neutrally on the bill. While ATPE supports efforts to expand pre-K, Exter identified a number of concerns. If charters are limited to only serving the students who qualify for the funding they receive, they may be set up to fail. Additionally, if providers receive a subsidy for half-day pre-K and are allowed to “upcharge” for the remainder of the day, the program could begin to resemble a pre-K voucher. Finally, certain accountability factors – such as teacher certification requirements – don’t apply to charter schools, and that has been a point of contention about public-private partnerships to provide pre-K in the past.

HB 1560 by Rep. Ryan Guillen (D-Rio Grande City) would remove an obsolete reference regarding open-enrollment charter schools from the statute outlining the powers of the State Board of Education (SBOE). This bill would not change the law in any material way.

Concluding Tuesday’s hearing, Chairman Huberty indicated the committee will consider legislation related to special education and health and safety next week.

Senate committee approves budget proposal

ThinkstockPhotos-185034697_gavelcashThe committee substitute to Senate Bill (SB) 1, the Senate’s budget bill, was voted favorably out of the Senate Finance Committee on a vote of 15 to 0 this morning. The SB 1 committee substitute, which appropriates $106.3 billion in general revenue, reflects all of the recommended modifications to individual articles of the budget made by the work groups and adopted by the full Finance Committee.

In her comments, committee chairwoman Sen. Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound) stated that SB 1 fully funds the Foundation School Program (FSP), including $2.6 billion for enrollment growth. Nelson also touted $25 million in spending for broadband expansion through the e-Rate program; $65 million to a new public / private partnership for pre-K (the committee substitute cuts $180 million in pre-K grants from SB 1 as it was originally filed); and $316 million to fund SB 788 by Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston), which would reform TRS-Care.

Senator Royce West (D-Dallas) probed staff from the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) on how to reconcile claims that SB1 fully funds the FSP while spending nearly $1.4 billion less in general revenue on the program. In response, LBB staff confirmed that SB 1 does fund the amount that current law calls for in FSP entitlements, but the funding level is $1.4 billion lower this session because increases in local property values mean that less funding is required through state general revenue. Due to this continued supplanting of state funding with local property taxes, the proportion of the state’s share of FSP funding is projected to decline to 38% or less by the end of the biennium.

SB 1 as substituted is expected to be brought up for a vote on the floor of the full Senate on Tuesday, March 28.