Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Because… Rauner!
Next Post: The Trump effect
Posted in:
* Last week, Gov. Rauner’s education czar Beth Purvis sent a letter to school superintendents to say that the debate over reforming the state’s school aid formula should not “hold up record funding for all schools in Illinois.”
Senate President Cullerton disagrees…
March 7, 2016
Dear Dr. Beth Purvis,
I read with interest your letter to Illinois public school superintendents.
Those superintendents, their teachers, students, parents and taxpayers need to know what the governor’s education budget actually does to their individual school districts. Since you have already calculated that you can fund the outdated foundation level with an additional $55 million in taxpayer resources, then perhaps you have already calculated the individual effects for each school district in Illinois.
Before arguing that the governor’s plan should pass “without delay,” you owe it to superintendents to provide them with information on the effects.
We both know that the governor’s plan will create winners and losers. We would like to know who they are before we vote.
Last year, Illinois Senate Democrats increased school funding by more than a quarter billion dollars – an investment the governor ultimately signed despite the lack of Republican support – and still many of the schools serving the most impoverished students in this state lost millions of dollars in state funding.
It speaks to the fundamental unfairness of our current system. It’s why Senate Democrats are committed to creating a better system that sends resources where they are most needed and can do the most good.
In order for us to do that we need information. Weeks ago, Senate Democrats sent you details regarding a possible alternative formula and asked that you break it down, district by district, so we could study the results and make changes and improvements.
We certainly will not vote for an education budget until we have this information.
Again, this information is vital so that the public can better understand the governor’s budget proposal and we can continue to explore how to overhaul the state’s unfair and outdated school finance system.
Sincerely,
John J. Cullerton
Illinois Senate President
Interesting.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:44 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Because… Rauner!
Next Post: The Trump effect
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“Dear Dr. Purvis,
Show your work.
Thanks,
President Cullerton”
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:47 am
Gear up the Cullerton is holding education hostage spin from the Raunerites.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:51 am
Cullerton is correct. Those who gain and those who lose, as well as those who remain even, all need to be identified. Negotiations over any “hold harmless” funding also needs to be specified per district. Each district needs this information, as do their legislators, with enough time to scrutinize carefully the effects.
Comment by My New Handle Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:52 am
Dear Education Czar
We want to check your homework.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:52 am
About those numbers, can we see the calculations?
Thanks,
People of Illinois
Comment by illini97 Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:52 am
The captives will be released once my demands have been met.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:56 am
Okay…giving the benefit of the doubt, Cullerton is being statesman like in his letter, and in his request - it’s about time. No more posturing, though posture is part and parcel in politics - but his common sense ask is what’s needed now. Facts only please, consideration, alternatives discussed - then vote up or down…good for him.
Comment by Captain Illini Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:56 am
Kind of an all-purpose position when dealing with this administration.
Comment by walker Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:56 am
Willy - you forgot to grade the paper. When I was a kid, not showing my work on the math test resulted in a “F” no matter if the answer was correct.
Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:58 am
Pay no attention to the many shell bills and votes this body has passed with less than 24 hours to review and debate the content before third reading.
This is different, I swear. This is for the kids. Politics has nothing to do with it.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 10:59 am
===The captives will be released once my demands have been met.===
Typical ” - Anonymous - ” bluster.
So, legislators should “vote before they know what’s in it”?
Hmm. I’ve heard that before.
To the move itself,
This cleary is the “fix” to the Cullerton Mistake and it’s a good fix to the Mistake too.
By forcing Dr. Purvis (Rauner Administration) to provide the statistical information first, it blunts the “hostage” aspect of the Cullerton Mistake and puts front and center the pivot of “winners and losers” and funding, while all but ignoring the “hostage” purpose Cullerton rolled out and backfired on him.
It’s well-played politics. Much better. The Cullerton Mistake might be a sweet smelling flower after all(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:02 am
The Rauner folks like the “trust us” route. Cullerton and the Senate Dems have taken the “show us” approach. Which one makes more sense? Shall we say Cullerton’s.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:03 am
Cullerton makes sense to me today.
Comment by X-prof Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:03 am
Oswego Willy 11:02 a.m. +1
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:05 am
“Trust us” and “don’t hold up funding…..”
Do they take chutzpah injections in the governor’s office?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:05 am
- Huh? -
I have to believe the first move is to provide the work, that’s one “ding”, let Dr. Purvis (Rauner Administration) provide the “work”, then you get the second “ding” and the bonus of their work being the lynch pin holding up funding.
Patience will win out.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:06 am
Back in the day, anytime there was a bill that did anything regarding the Funding Formula, legislative staff would ask for and receive detailed printouts from the State Board of Education. These printouts would be broken down by legislative district, and show the effects of the bill’s changes down to the school district level. Legislators could quickly see if their schools were winners or losers under the proposal. I take it that doesn’t happen anymore. What a shame.
Comment by TwoFeetThick Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:06 am
Mr. Cullerton is correct. Rauner and Purvis are going to have to be transparent to proceed. When a “no trust” environment is what they want, that’s what they get. Good job!
Rauner in Mt. Vernon on Friday, “And right now they’re talking about, ‘Let’s do a millionaire’s tax to fund our schools,’” Rauner said. “That’s political games. That’s not really — money’s money. Whether you bring it in for whatever, it’s a question of where you’re going to spend it.”
What the heck is money’s money?
“Rauner says with $38 billion coming into state bank accounts every year, there’s more than enough money to send to Illinois classrooms.”
Hello? Anybody home? There is not $38b coming into the state. The new number from COGFA, last week, was $31.67b. That’s a 20% error. Please. Keep up.
“Illinois, disproportionately relative to most states, relies on local property taxes,” he said. “That hurts rural districts that don’t have as much property tax income.”
Hmmm. Property taxes. As I have said before, I would gladly pay a higher income tax rate on my income over $1,000,000, in exchange for DELETING the local school district from my property tax bill!
http://www.wsiltv.com/story/31390584/touring-mt-vernon-school-rauner-calls-for-funding-change
Comment by cdog Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:08 am
OW is spot on. Cullerton knows that, despite increasing funding overall, perennial winners will win again and losers will lose more. He’ll compare that to Rauner’s statement that “I won’t support a funding system that creates winners and losers”, and show how Rauner’s rhetoric doesn’t match the data. Then, it’s clearly Rauner holding up funding according to his own mantra.
Comment by out of touch Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:12 am
In order to plan, school districts clearly need to know the numbers. Most districts only have tentative budgets in place for the 2016-17 school year because they can no longer predict how much money the state will send them. Many have increased their tax levy because they fear the double whammy of a cut in state funding and a property tax freeze.
Comment by Former Hoosier Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:14 am
It’s a good letter and addresses fair funding for all districts without separating CPS for special treatment.
Good work; let’s hope Cullerton gets a reasoned response and the data needed.
Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:14 am
Thank god. We in human services have been saying for months now that Dems would be insane to fund FY17 k-12 the way they did in FY16. Maybe this will wake up the suburban parents out there. Rauner’s begging for a clean bill during the budget address made it clear what hostage he values and it sure ain’t us. All in, all in. Let’s get this thing solved.
Comment by Pawn Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:15 am
How could this be legitimate? It sounds nothing like a Goldberg missive! /s
Comment by D.P.Gumby Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:17 am
Just the facts, ma’am.
Comment by TinyDancer(FKA Sue) Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:18 am
Is the Governor smart enough to box Dems into a position where they create more hostages than he? Is that his plan? Or is he playing checkers to Madigan’s/Cullerton’s chess? (Sadly, we realize this is.not a game.)
Comment by Diogenes in DuPage Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:19 am
A superintendent it would be just dandy to see the numbers. Budgeting and the levy have become an abstract exercise. Not only is our budgeting cycle dysfunctional (levy in December, state tells us what we get in February in good years, budgets due in September) we never know what is actually going to show up. I am not sure the governor would run a business this way.
Any who, the two categories of schools that are getting hit the worst are those in the middle (not rich enough and not poor enough) and poor districts with declining enrollment. Would be nice for a little relief for those two groups.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:22 am
I read that fine print in Rauner’s new K-12 funding plan cuts the state contribution to the TRS retired teachers medical insurance fund to zero. No wonder Rauner’s group wants to rush it through before anyone has thoroughly examined what is in this plan. I would hope Cullerton would restore the cuts to the medical insurance before approving any “plan”.
Comment by DuPage Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:24 am
Cullerton remembering the long game. Well played. Next move for Rauner: comply.
Comment by Independent retired lawyer, journalist Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:24 am
That March 10 hearing where ISBE is supposed to talk about the proposed education budget would probably be a good place for the administration to start providing some budget info.
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/committees/hearing.asp?CommitteeID=1574
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:25 am
Hey DuPage, What are you, some kind of Poindexter? /s
Comment by Beaner Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:34 am
Dupage says, “Rauner’s new K-12 funding plan cuts the state contribution to the TRS retired teachers medical insurance fund to zero”
I have read of this too. There are teachers who have been retired for DECADES that would be destroyed if the Rauner Agenda were to be allowed.
Can we infer from Rauner’s stated objectives of kicking everyone off state health insurance, and now retirement health insurance, that he supports Bernie Sander’s socialistic single-payer Medicare For All plan?
It’s an either/or moment. Rauner is either in support of the above, or social Darwinism.
Comment by cdog Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:47 am
Purvis is probably the most competent person in Rauners administration. Between Cullerton and Purvis on the subject of education- I would bet Beth will come out on top. Last year when the legislature held hearings and started off wanting to hate her- by the time it was done the Dems were bending over backwards with their complements. Class is not common in the administration- Beth is a pro and won’t lose this fight
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:49 am
ANY formula produces winners and losers. All 3 of Sen. Manar’s proposals have winners and losers (and winners and losers within poorer school districts).
Can anyone describe the current Manar proposal in 100 words or less? It is very, very complex.
Comment by winners and losers Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:56 am
Sue, this fight is not about Purvis. Go to 30,000 feet. This fight is about not doing a K-12 education budget just because the Gov wants one.
Comment by Pawn Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:59 am
Hit send too soon.
Purvis was showing none of her intellectual prowess in that letter to superintendents either. I doubt she even wrote it. I agree that she is highly competent, but she is not at all independent here. Just a puppet of the Governor.
Comment by Pawn Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:01 pm
Winners and losers is right on.
Pawn is as well. From the 30,000 foot view, Cullerton risks Democrats being blamed by voters for schools not opening on time if this turns into a standoff.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:25 pm
I just think it’s nice that Senator Cullerton addressed Dr. Purvis by name.
Comment by northsider (the original) Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:29 pm
===Cullerton risks Democrats being blamed by voters for schools not opening on time if this turns into a standoff.===
Nope.
Cullerton will have the Dr. Purvis numbers, the Rauner quote and promise, and both the promise and numbers won’t work.
Actually, a great recovery from the Cullerton Mistake
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:31 pm
“this information is vital so that the public can better understand the governor’s budget proposal”
Contact the IL State Board of Education to get the calculations on the new formula by district. It number might be on ISBE’s webpage..
Comment by Mama Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:38 pm
If it is not on ISBE’s webpage, they should be told to post it.
Comment by Mama Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:39 pm
His call for immediate resolution of K-12 funding was a tell: it is his weakness.
He anticipates obstacles well and wants to be free to continue the stalemate for another year if necessary. But he doesn’t believe he can deflect the blame for closed schools onto the legislative leaders.
He knows ordinary working parents all around the state who are not now paying attention to Springfield and will need a place for their children to go during the day this fall will be very unhappy, vocal hostages, right before an election.
Comment by James Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:47 pm
pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, just bring me those ruby slippers and I will send you home.
Comment by Facts are Stubborn Things Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:51 pm
Winners= CPS and many downstate dists, Losers = Suburban dists. Look at Property tax rates, adjust accordingly… move on. CPS gets at least 33% of spending (much greater when formulas for disadvantaged are included) with only 27% of students. All formulas greatly favor CPS. The City made the deal that gave them control. They got it and exploited the CTU. Now we all get to pay for that mismanagement and largesse.
Comment by the Cardinal Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:27 pm
=Can anyone describe the current Manar proposal in 100 words or less? It is very, very complex.=
It takes a reduced pool of funding and redistributes the funding using a politically motivated formula.
The link below takes you to a page that will tell you what SB1 will do to/for your district.
http://isbe.net/budget/html/ed-funding.htm
For information on the impact of the governor’s budget on your district, go to isbe.net and look on the right hand side under “Hot Topics”.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:24 pm
Sorry - anonymous - OW gets my drift.
Comment by Pawn Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:36 pm
Pension proposal is illegal. Raises are not constitutionally guaranteed, however, if you get a raise then your pension is based on that salary or it’s portion as it pertained to highest 4 years/last days pay etc. That pension salary formula is a protected benefit or the pension protection clause would mean nothing because you don’t have to change the benefits you just simply change the formula….either way the result is a diminishment.
Comment by Facts are Stubborn Things Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:37 pm
sorry about my “pension” post, I meant to post in under the “Cullerton responds to Rauner”.
Comment by Facts are Stubborn Things Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:40 pm
Winners and losers and JS Mill, regarding summarizing Manar’s funding plan.
You can do better than that.
I’m not talking about your comments, I’m summarizing what his plan says about our current system.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:41 pm
@Michelle Flaherty-
With respect, I am not sure what you meant by your comment, but that is truly the most accurate and succinct summary of Manar’s plan. He offered no explanation or rationale for his formula weighting or development, so after speaking with him directly, I can only surmise that he does not have one. When we revised his plan it did push a little more money “downstate” but in the end it was designed to win votes. Just my opinion, but I looked at it thoroughly.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:53 pm
Unfortunately JS Mill is correct in saying -
“redistributes the funding using a politically motivated formula.”
Sen. Manar has now gone to the extreme of saying any money placed into the current formulas is
“a waste of money.”
The formulas work perfectly well as long as the State is funding about 50 percent, but it has not come close to that in years.
You can NOT blame the formulas (the 59 highest wealth districts receive $218 per student in General State Aid, while the 77 poorest school districts receive over $4,000 per student in General State Aid) when Illinois has not even paid the $6,119 Foundation level - which has been frozen in State law since 2010 and was not raised in 2010 to the recommended level - the Foundation level should now be near $9,000 per student.
Manar has rejected any idea that did not benefit HIS schools, and Cullerton’s schools.
However JS Mill’s reference to the ISBE website is out of date. Those are for the first two Manar proposals - not the current 3rd one which is being tightly held.
Comment by winners and losers Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 3:39 pm
@Winner’s and loser’s- I should have checked closer, my bad. It is what is available, I have not seen his latest either.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 4:09 pm
Why is Manar’s third education funding formula proposal being held?
Comment by Mama Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 5:48 pm
Cullerton/Manar are trying to get agreement with the Governor’s office on any school formula changes.
“Weeks ago, Senate Democrats sent you details regarding
a possible alternative formula
and asked that you break it down, district by district, so we could study the results and make changes and improvements.”
Comment by winners and losers Wednesday, Mar 9, 16 @ 8:41 am
“Printout politics” used to be the scourge of the General Assembly. Printouts made it almost impossible to come to a rational policy decision. Apparently legislators finally got away from them and made funding decisions based on something else, I’m not sure what. Now they want the printouts back. Kind of funny.
Comment by Printout Guy Wednesday, Mar 9, 16 @ 11:33 am