Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

What’s in the education approp bill?

Posted in:

Illinois

Rauner signed House Bill 3763, which provides state spending authority for general state aid to public school districts, the backbone of state financial support for public schools.

The bill also contains funding for early childhood education programs, bilingual education and required payments to the downstate teacher pension system.

* Sun-Times…

Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the bill Rauner signed may have some contradictions.

“There appears to be elements to what he’s approved that are contradictory to his introduced budget as it relates to pension and health care funding that are part of the bill,” Brown said. “We’ll just take a review. That might offer some clues as to what their overall plan is.”

I think what he’s talking about there is the bill’s fully funded teachers healthcare program and pension payments. You’ll recall that Rauner wanted to short both.

* Tribune…

Now, [Tony Sanders, CEO of Elgin School District U46, the second-largest district in the state] said, attention will shift to the Illinois State Board of Education, which decides how the money gets doled out. Both the spending plan Rauner signed and the amount he requested in his budget proposal were short of the amount that the state is supposed to contribute to schools, Sanders said.

In past years, the education board has handled the situation by making across-the-board reductions in the state’s payments to school districts. That disproportionately affects less-affluent districts, Sanders said.

* More on that from my old pal Dusty Rhodes…

It’s been years since Illinois funded schools at the proper level. This new budget is a mere 8 percent short of what the state actually owes school districts. That makes it slightly higher than last year’s level, but still lower than 2007, which takes some of the confetti out of the party. This legislation does, however, do more than just authorize funding. It actually changes the way the state distributes the money — setting aside $85 million to go to the neediest districts first, while the wealthiest wait till last.

This concept is known as “fill from the bottom.” It was pushed by a coalition of school officials and community activists called Funding Illinois’ Future. […]

Illinois relies on local property taxes to support schools. In districts that don’t have enough property wealth to reach a minimum funding level — currently $6,119 per student per year — the state is supposed to kick in the difference. But for the past few years, Illinois has shortchanged each district by 11 to 13 percent. That across-the-board reduction has meant that the neediest districts suffer the greatest loss.

“You’ll see some districts who over the past few years have lost $30 per student, and other districts that have lost $1,100 per student and everything in between,” [FIF’s Teresa Ramos] said. “And what you’ll find is districts that have higher percentages of low-income students, students who are English language learners, African American and Latino students, you’ll find that those districts have been losing more.” […]

The education spending legislation Rauner signed effectively caps each district’s loss at $232 per student.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:14 am

Comments

I guess we’ll soon see how much influence Rev. Meeks has on the process and steering money to the School Districts that need it the most in Illinois.

Comment by Flava Dave Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:21 am
I wasn’t aware the loss per student now has a cap for everyone. That’s a very good thing IMO. Also as I opened my newspapers this morning, all the headlines are making Rauner look like a hero for signing this bill. Was this perhaps part of his plan? Most people aren’t aware of the back story and the May 29 vote with the brick in place.

Comment by Former Merit Comp Slave Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:23 am
- Former Merit Comp Slave -,

…at the cost… of the GOP GA, voting “no”

Yep, that brick was pure legislative genius.

You’re on it, the backstory is the story.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:26 am
===Most people aren’t aware of the back story and the May 29 vote with the brick in place. ===

When a governor signs a bill, he owns it, for good or bad. Same goes for vetoes.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:27 am
The bill funds Mrs. Rauner’s organization?

Comment by Juvenal Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:28 am
In light of the Supremes decision, it’s good to see that the governor has changed his mind and decided to responsibly fund earned pension and health benefits.

Of course, the way things have been going with his crew, it’s possible that he didn’t know the funding was in the bill he signed, as I think Brown is hinting,

Still, it’s a good thing.

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:30 am
I think the question should be, what isn’t in the bill? No one seems to be talking about ISBE appropriations to administer the grants.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:30 am
So, he had legislative Republicans all vote against the bill, and now he signs it with news releases from groups like Stand for Children trumpeting the measure.

They must feel like a bunch of tools right now….

Comment by Juvenal Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:31 am
Great theater to see Mr. Brown offer up criticism of the bill his boss rammed through. You just can’t make this stuff up.

Comment by A guy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:33 am
Is Brown claiming that the House inserted a poison pill or two to try to provoke a veto?

Comment by Louis G Atsaves Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:34 am
It boiled down to Rauner owning the schools not opening on time,… or Rauner making sure schools open on time…

Rauner was going to own one of those.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:35 am
===Great theater to see Mr. Brown offer up criticism of the bill his boss rammed through. You just can’t make this stuff up.===

Thank goodness the entire GOP GA didn’t vote for Rauner’s Education Appropriation then…

I mean, if we’re to applaud the Governor for making sure schools open on time, I guess… he own the bill.

I’m sure those not voting for the bill will criticize the governor too.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:39 am
At first I thought the Governor was just shoring up his weakest defenses, to prepare for future battles. And that was net a Rauner’s win. Now it appears that Madigan not only got the level of funding he preferred,(lower than Rauner but higher than last year), but got some structural wins too.

Is this the new route to budget spending compromise? Approp bill by approp bill?

Comment by walker Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:40 am
=That across-the-board reduction has meant that the neediest districts suffer the greatest loss.=

This is true in real dollars, but the way the GSA formula is currently configured has created some disproportion favoring some “poor” districts. The fact is that poor communities do not always mean poor districts and vice versa.

The Cicero-Berwyn districts, particularly Cicero 99 have been operating significant surplus budgets for years. Cicero has established huge reserves off of these surplus budgets. Most of their funding comes from the state, they also receive major federal funding. Annually they get $10 million to more than $15 million more than they actually spend (need). They are a high poverty, high esl, high needs district. But the formula drives massive amounts of money their way. Even with proration/reduction they have run surpluses. They received $4 million of the $97 million in supplemental funds and will likely get a big chunk of the $85 million. The other Cicero-Berwyn districts made out pretty well too. This is a problem that needs to be addressed so that truly needy districts, those really in dire straights can get the necessary funds from the state.

U 46 is not one of those districts with $500 million in the bank. U 46’s Tony Sanders had no compunction about going to springfield and asking that money be taken from other districts and be sent his way.

This type of “vulchering” only helps the state and not schools. The conversation is diverted from proper funding to dividing a diminished pool of funds.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:41 am
Guy, you’ve proven time and again that you can make up anything.

Where do you see Brown’s criticism of the bill the governor signed? He’s pointing out that there are differences with it and the governor’s proposed funding of pensions and health.

Remember, that day back in February, when the governor proposed a budget? I can understand why it’s slipped your mind. It’s been on the milk carton for months.

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:42 am
Is it possible that no one in the Governor’s office read the bill?

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:43 am
OW- with respect, schools were going to open. That is a bit of hyperbole on the part of many.

CPS might be a different issue but most of us have received or about to receive our first property tax payment with a second coming in or around the beginning of October. Schools would have the cash to open.

November would be the time when many started to go broke. That may only be prolonging the inevitable but schools were going to open, they just might have closed for the year 6 months earlier than most parents expected!

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:46 am
===Wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:42 am:

Guy, you’ve proven time and again that you can make up anything.

Where do you see Brown’s criticism of the bill the governor signed? He’s pointing out that there are differences with it and the governor’s proposed funding of pensions and health.====

Sling, Oh, I don’t know…maybe in the post from Rich a few inches above…

+Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said the bill Rauner signed may have some contradictions.+

Let’s see here. Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said (sic) the bill my boss passed in a cynical approach to hamstring the Governor, may have some contradictions that our side purposely put in there because we’re not serious about legislation benefiting the state, but must maintain our power over every branch of government. I’m out here telling you this so quickly because we knew what we put in the bill in the first place. Now we’ve got to figure out how we can take credit for opening schools on time but shorting the budget. I need to posture to buy more time. But, know I’ll be back. Right now I’ve got a silly hearing to go to in order to propagate more hooey”.

Comment by A guy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:51 am
- JS Mill -,

With respect,

Giving the GOP GA a 30 minute heads up that Rauner was signing the bill doesn’t sound like everyone was convinced Rauner wouldn’t let schools open.

Nothing, so far, that this governor has done, has been by a playbook seen by most.

The good and the bad.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:53 am
Guy, try reading for comprehension. If you’re serious, you really don’t get it.

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:55 am
A guy, did you fall and hit your head recently?

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:55 am
=Giving the GOP GA a 30 minute heads up that Rauner was signing the bill doesn’t sound like everyone was convinced Rauner wouldn’t let schools open.=

I have no doubt that they believed that and, without GSA and categorical payments, it would lead to many, many schools closing.

And you are right about his playbook, throwing the GOP under the bus etc.

All spot on.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:57 am
A guy:

I think you completely missed the point of Steve Brown’s statement. The point was that the Governor signed a bill that runs contrary to his desire to cut healthcare benefits and change the pension system. By signing this bill he funds both at the same levels they are now. Steve Brown was clearly being snarky towards the Governor and was offering a not so subtle poke at him for signing a bill that runs contrary to everything he has proposed so far.

Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:03 am
Can anyone explain to me why Rauner would sign something into law which “fully funded teachers healthcare program and pension payments. You’ll recall that Rauner wanted to short both.”

Did he and his people not read this thing? Did he just get seriously, seriously played by Madigan? Please forgive my naivete, but I just can’t believe anyone could be that obtuse.

Comment by dzipio Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:04 am
- dzipio -,

Rauner needed schools open. That’s it.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:08 am
However it went down, it’s the most responsible and gubernatorial thing Rauner has done yet.

So, salud.

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:09 am
I understand, OW, but couldn’t be have line itemed those out or sent the whole thing back to allow his people some cover? There is not a whole lot of time pressure right now.

Comment by dzipio Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:13 am
=Can anyone explain to me why Rauner would sign something into law which “fully funded teachers healthcare program and pension payments. You’ll recall that Rauner wanted to short both.”=

Are you advocating for shorting the state’s fiscal responsibilities or just trying to understand what was behind his decision making?

I guess I am trying to understand your post a bit better.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:23 am
“..setting aside $85 million to go to the neediest districts first, while the wealthiest wait till last.”

At some point yesterday, Manar did a Gronk spike…

http://twitpic.com/ecoqa5

Comment by Under Influenced Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:27 am
JS, for once we agree on something. there really is no “means test” on state funding, and determining who is “needy” based on indefinite criteria just makes the corruption of school funding more political. Actually, especially in South Cook County, students from “poor” districts often have astronomical spending. Thornton HS district 205, for example, has very high operational spending (about $19K per student) while “rich” Lincoln Way 210 only spends about $12K per student. The way they spend the money in Thornton sure doesn’t seem to be doing much good based on the student outcomes based on school report card test results. Could they do just as well if they were spending $14K per student instead of $19K? Probably, since class sizes are not exceptionally low there.

What really needs to be done is to get past the Augenblick and Meyers model for foundation levels. It needs to be replaced with a regionally indexed schedule and salary schedule, and making “poverty” grants for extra bucks annually renewable and contingent on objective improvement in student outcomes.

The current system is a dysfunctional mess, and it needs to be modified to incentivize improving student outcomes, proper control of non-instructional spending according to metrics, and proper staffing levels for instruction and non-instruction.

Of course, setting statewide salary guidelines for staffing, salaries and benefits for fairness on distributing state aid would certainly draw fire from our friends at the CTU, IFT and IEA

Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:30 am
=for once we agree on something=

I think this is the second time, and yes….I am starting to get concerned.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:41 am
===…but couldn’t be have line itemed those out or sent the whole thing back to allow his people some cover? There is not a whole lot of time pressure right now.===

The game plan is to own as little as possible.

Signing it whole, without the AV allows only one needed excuse.

An AV, that owns every morsel, why this, not that, why here, not there.

Signing as a whole, one excuse, one blame. One thousand times easier to deflect.

There was never going to be cover for the GOP GA. I knew that, the GOP GA members are learning it now, or 30 minutes before signature.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:42 am
=setting statewide salary guidelines for staffing=

Whom would you have do that? How do you think the IEA/IFT/CPU might influence that process? I do not think it would go the way you think it would.

I am certain that would cost my district substantially more money. Our numbers are below regional and same-size district averages. That includes my compensation (unfortunately /snark).

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:44 am
Dzipio, both the payments for TRS and TRIP have statutory continuing approps, so even if the Governor had reduction or line item vetoes those amounts, the payments would still get made. So he probably figured he was just better off signing the thing in its entirety versus making a meaningless gesture. (Not that this group is necessarily opposed to meaningless gestures)

Comment by Juice Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:48 am
I’m still thinking of those poor GOP staffers trying to think up ways to deal with their bosses voting no on an education budget approved by their party’s gov.

Comment by Norseman Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:50 am
- Norseman -,

If this isn’t a wake up call to try to be much more autonomous, I seriously don’t know what would;

Members voted as the Governor demanded for the greater good, only to be, in complete unison, double-crossed for the Governor’s own skin. The Governor used you. All if you. Collectively. As pawns.

Now what?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 10:56 am
“fill from the bottom” (take care of poorest districts first).

Kudos to Rauner on this one.

Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:06 am
Anything from Durkin and Radogno yet on how they were shamwowed?

Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:09 am
=“fill from the bottom” (take care of poorest districts first).

Kudos to Rauner on this one.=

1) If it actuall happens and,

2) That was not Rauners plan

3) Credit where credit is due, he signed it.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:15 am
“The education spending legislation Rauner signed effectively caps each district’s loss at $232 per student.”
Is the $232 per student amount for one day, one month or one year?

Comment by Mama Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:28 am
Is there money for student transportation or gifted programs, etc.? How much money for charter/private schools? What is ISBE’s breakdown for the budget the governor gave the new state superintendent?

Comment by Mama Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:31 am
“The bill funds Mrs. Rauner’s organization? ”
Yes

Comment by Mama Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:32 am
@JS MIll 10:23, I am genuinely asking. I am pleased as Punch that he signed it. Frankly, I think he got snookered and the geniuses who work for him didn’t tell him what he was signing. Honestly, it is the end of June, he could have taken some time to read it. However, I think impulsiveness, arrogance and a desire to get his ego stroked in the papers drove this. And eventually he may realize how much better Madigan is at politics than he and the frat boys are. It will only be as he is leaving office, however, with a handful of ashes where his “turnaround agenda” was.

Comment by dzipio Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:52 am
Why is noone talking about the fact that he did not sign HB 4151 which provides operational dollars to administer the grants…so who’s going to administer the ISBE budget? I don’t think those folks work for free. Can schools get grants if ISBE has no employees to voucher them? If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, does the media report that it made a sound anyway because they work on assumptions?

Comment by Umm Hello? Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 11:55 am
@JSMILL
=Whom would you have do that? How do you think the IEA/IFT/CPU might influence that process? I do not think it would go the way you think it would.

I am certain that would cost my district substantially more money. Our numbers are below regional and same-size district averages. That includes my compensation (unfortunately /snark).=

Actually, JS, the way I would design the system would benefit low spending districts the most. The logic behind the system would be that if you overpay staff and overstaff your team, there’s a presumption that you don’t need state money as much because you can be so generous. Inverse proportionality. For example, if state average salary and benefit packages is $72K, and your district chooses to pay $92K in salary and benefits, there would be a reduction in state aid.

While we’re at it, why not strike a blow against “income inequality’, shall we? If your top base salary on your schedule exceeds 50% for staff doing the same job with the same class size and student load, give reductions to state aid for “equality” sake(LOL).

If you spend more than a certain amount on non-instructional expenses per student annually, it will also result in less state aid.

Of course, two reforms need to come first; prohibiting public employee strikes as is done in 41 other states more sensible and public centered than Illinois, and finding a way of shifting costs of pensions to individual school districts and making adjustments to the state aid formula to help out with the costs. The only way pension costs will ever be controlled is at the local level, and to consider pension contributions part of school compensation as is the case in virtually every other service industry. The unions will object to no longer “having their cake and eating it too”, but I understand that most states put the pension costs on the districts, and that pension contributions for this purpose are considered “education state aid”, unlike Illinois where pension costs for teacher and staff pensions aren’t considered part of state aid for schools.

Of course it’s not all this simple, but first you start with a mission, goals, and methodology and fill in the blanks from there.

Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:09 pm
=Is the $232 per student amount for one day, one month or one year?= that loss cap is for the annual payment.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:11 pm
Juice is spot on. Rauner already lost the battle on changing pensions and cutting TRIP. He would just be foolish to mess with the money at this point.

That’s not to say that Madigan’s crew can’t give him a good tweakin’ about it.

Comment by Arthur Andersen Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:41 pm
= who’s going to administer the ISBE budget? I don’t think those folks work for free. =

The employees will still be there, but they won’t have the appropriation authority voucher those grant payments unless there is a court order.

Comment by Dirty Red Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:45 pm
=Is the $232 per student amount for one day, one month or one year?=

Chiming in here for more background on the “loss cap” - the concept is only relevant in circumstances when the GSA appropriation isn’t enough to fully fund the statutory Foundation Level. The approp is 92% of the amt needed to fully fund the claim and as a result, ISBE has - for 5 years now - prorated all districts across the board. (So your districts most reliant on GSA lost more than $1k per pupil per year and your wealthiest lose less than $30 per pupil per year.) Under this budget, now no district will lose more than $232 per pupil per year under proration. Proration assumes everyone takes a cut. This minimizes the cut to the ones who lose the most under it.

The Funding Coalition/Stand/Advance/sch mgt groups etc. signed on as proponents of HB 3763 when it was up before the General Assembly. So at least that shouldn’t come as a surprise to any of the Republicans who voted against it.

Comment by Jack Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:47 pm
===47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 9:55 am:

A guy, did you fall and hit your head recently?===

When all the harpies in the playpen start the chant of “what you just don’t get”, that’s when you know you’re onto something.

I hit my head everyday reading here. What exactly to you call self-fulfilling prophecies that fail to fulfill? Whatever it is, pass it on to Sling and Willy too. They always know what’s going to happen and then it doesn’t. Oy.

Comment by A guy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:49 pm
LOL, what do you think you’re on to, Guy?

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:53 pm
- A Guy -,

Seriously, what are you trying to say?

Rauner, after demanding no one be “green” on this Ed Approp, he backstabs the GOP GA.

No spin there. That happened.

When a governor acts as such his/her actions are owned.

There is no spin there.

You can’t cheer Rauner for doing something, then say someone else owns a very specific action done solely by Rauner. Rauner chose to sign and open schools. Rauner could’ve vetoed, could’ve AV’ed, but Rauner chose to sign.

There’s a picture of Rauner signing, lol.

Rauner, not personal, owns is actions like every single governor in the history… of ever.

What confuses you?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 12:57 pm
===Let’s see here. Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said (sic) the bill my boss passed in a cynical approach to hamstring the Governor, may have some contradictions that our side purposely put in there because we’re not serious about legislation benefiting the state, but must maintain our power over every branch of government. I’m out here telling you this so quickly because we knew what we put in the bill in the first place. Now we’ve got to figure out how we can take credit for opening schools on time but shorting the budget. I need to posture to buy more time. But, know I’ll be back. Right now I’ve got a silly hearing to go to in order to propagate more hooey”.===

A guy,

I was referring to your earlier comment, and feared that your wild spinning caused you to fall and hit your head. Given the facts and the context, most of us had no trouble understanding Brown’s comment. You on the other hand have spun yourself into the ground on this one.

Answer my first question, if you can. Did anyone in the Governor’s office read the bill before he signed it? If so, how did they miss this stuff? Don’t put this on Brown or Madigan. The blame for signing a bill that undercuts Rauner’s own talking points lies somewhere on the 2nd Floor.

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 1:32 pm
47W, I don’t work there. I can’t testify to who did or did not read the bill, even if I’m subpoenaed by the House.

I know from reading this entry, Mr. Brown read it, or it was read to him. He has a map of where the open man holes are and he was anxious to tell us.

As for signing this bill. My speculation was that on balance, it was close enough, given the consequences of not signing it. 400,000 children and tens of thousands of parents were hanging in the balance; not to mention those teaching in and operating the schools.

So, I would guess that they didn’t miss “this stuff”. They just did an analysis of the +/-, and he signed the only bill he could sign to avert a school shutdown.

I don’t know. I thought that would make you happy. Now I’m going to go hit my head. Yet again.

Comment by A guy Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 1:45 pm
I’m with 47th Ward on this one. Someone in Rauner’s camp should have found the kryptonite in this bill, but Rauner was too eager to look like a hero for the papers and no one wanted to tell the boss he couldn’t.

Comment by dzipio Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 2:33 pm
Guy, you’re aware that the governor has a range of veto powers? It’s not all or nothing for him.

Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Jun 25, 15 @ 4:26 pm