Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: Stop the carnage and get to a real plan
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
We saw some examples last week of why school funding reform is so difficult to accomplish in Illinois.
House Republican Leader Jim Durkin appeared with Gov. Bruce Rauner at Lyons Township High School, which is in Durkin’s district. Durkin pointed out to reporters that the school would lose $1.9 million in state funding under Sen. Andy Manar’s controversial school funding reform bill.
Leader Durkin also claimed that every school district in his House district would lose funding with Manar’s proposal. Chicago, he noted, would gain hundreds of millions of dollars. Durkin declared that he and his members could not and would not support a plan that shoveled bigtime bucks at Chicago while cutting their own districts.
-But that’s really the whole point of Manar’s plan. He wants to shift state funding away from wealthier suburban districts like those Durkin represents (14.2 percent of Lyons Township High School students are from low-income households) to districts that have high numbers of impoverished students (86 percent of Chicago Public Schools students are from low-income households). Sen. Manar wants a “hold harmless” provision to make sure no district loses money right away, but that’ll cost quite a bit of cash, which the state doesn’t currently have.
Leader Durkin represents half of Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno’s district, so convincing both of those chamber leaders to sign off on a plan that takes state money away from their own schools is just as difficult as convincing the two Chicago Democrats who head up the House and Senate to agree to Gov. Rauner’s K-12 funding proposal that reduces Chicago’s annual appropriation by $74 million because of the state’s antiquated and complicated funding formula.
Like I said, this ain’t easy.
The governor has also dumped all over Sen. Manar’s plan. He and his his surrogates have slammed the proposal as a Chicago “bailout” and have vowed campaign reprisals.
It’s not exactly the same, of course, but, in a way, Sen. Manar is to Senate President John Cullerton what former state Sen. Barack Obama was to Senate President Emil Jones, who helped mentor Obama’s rise to power.
Manar is Cullerton’s former chief of staff and Cullerton is helping him any way he can. He’s essentially Cullerton’s golden boy.
There is no doubt that Sen. Manar has worked this piece of legislation harder than any individual has worked a bill in recent memory. He has traveled from one end of the state to the other, meeting with school superintendents and other education leaders in an attempt to cobble together a workable plan. He was on Chicago’s South Side just the other day, which produced smirks from some Republicans who believe he’s attempting to use this issue to advance his political career.
But the reality is Manar has Cullerton’s full support, and Cullerton has been far more cooperative about coming up with a deal to end the months-long governmental stalemate than has House Speaker Michael Madigan. So, maybe the governor and his peeps should lay off the rhetoric a bit because things are tough enough.
Cullerton allowed Manar to hold a vote on his funding plan last week, even though Manar and other Democrats went out of their way to declare that the bill needs a lot more work.
Republicans claimed that forcing the vote could very well make it more difficult to reach an agreement on education spending. Many freely admit that the current system is horribly flawed. But the school funding formula is so crazily complicated that any successful revamp will take serious bipartisan effort. And, indeed, talks have been held to devise a more easily constructed “bridge” between today’s system and a future more in line with Manar’s vision.
But the Republicans say by running Manar’s bill instead of negotiating, the Senate Democrats may have very well hardened positions on their side of the aisle. Only one Republican voted for it, after all.
So the momentum has shifted to the other chamber, where a special committee led by House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie is attempting to construct an alternative. But there are those who believe Madigan isn’t serious about getting something done.
But someone had better come up with something soon because Manar said last week there was no way he will vote for the governor’s K-12 appropriations bill because it slashes funding for schools in his district, as did other Senate Democrats. And even some Downstate Republicans who voted against Manar’s bill would prefer a different formula to prevent their own schools from losing state money under the current formula.
We could wind up with no school funding at all.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 16, 16 @ 8:56 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: Stop the carnage and get to a real plan
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
To the Post,
I nominated Sen. Manar for the a Golden Horseshoe for this exact reason…
===There is no doubt that Sen. Manar has worked this piece of legislation harder than any individual has worked a bill in recent memory. He has traveled from one end of the state to the other, meeting with school superintendents and other education leaders in an attempt to cobble together a workable plan.===
That said, his plan needs serious, serious work, and the reason I know that is the continued dialog, discussion, and the simple fact, above anything, is the highlighting of a need to fix the formula and one GA member putting pen to paper to “start somewhere” and not abandoning the plan as roadblocks, some rightly, pop up.
Sen. Manar deserves the credit to bring this problem outside the “we need more money”, “they don’t want to help students”. It’s a purposed flawed plan that in working legislative bodies and an engaged Executive coujd lead to that cobbling, and could lead to a compromise that actually solves problems.
“You know what”, you can’t continually be attacking mercilessly and think there’s no fallout, “and you know what”, there’s yet to be someone that says “all is fine, formula, shmaformula” and is a-ok with where the state is on education funding, “and you know what”, pointing out the glaring obvious flaws as a political manuver, when working to iron out flaws is the best political manuver, that’s also a way to hold hostage a solution.
The Education Formula “challenge” is a heavy lift all on its own. Both sides don’t need to out more weight on, especially when there’s no counter to alleviate the weight already there.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 16, 16 @ 9:12 am
There are many thoughtful, intelligent people jumping on the Manar bandwagon, and I get why. He talks of helping “poor” kids.
A noble effort until you understand the numbers and are able to look inside his “plan” and see what is really happening.
Manar is traveling the state and he is talking to superintendents. But, he is primarily talking to a group that has stepped forward and shamelessly advocated for taking funding from other, often struggling districts (simply look at McLean and surrounding Counties for examples). This is simply wrong, immoral, and unprofessional. We should not engage in vulture economics. We should not hurt the future of other students to enhance ours.
Ending the “Flat Grant” probably isn’t going to hurt New Trier or Stevenson. I have my doubts that any of the “Flat Grant” schools would have to change course if the lost their $218 per student.
The schools that get hurt the most are the districts that are financially middle of the road. Districts that are geographically large but with smaller populations (especially those that are in a gradual decline but also have 25-55% poverty). These districts get gutted by Manar’s plan. His changes have only worsened the impact. Most of these districts have been cutting their spending for the last five years.
This cannot be allowed to continue. While consolidation might be right for a few, many are already more than 200 square miles and increasing the size would decrease economic feasibility.
Contrary to popular political narratives, the current formula can work, or at least work better. It has to start with fully funding the formula, the foundation number has not changed since FY 2009, and fully fund the MCAT’s.
That is step one.
Step two is revising the GSA formula and extracting the poverty grant, addressing poverty funding separately and uniquely.
Step three is new, better funding for schools that makes sense. If the two previous steps are taken there will be relief for all and time to address a better formula. It also gives the state time to get it’s finances in better shape before taking on a major school funding initiative.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 16, 16 @ 9:33 am
Manar does not deserve that much credit. There have been no real negotiations over the last 2 years. The basic structure of SB 231 is exactly the same as the two previous bills.
Yes, Manar is Cullerton’s golden boy, and Manar has statewide ambitions.
But we will not change the school funding formulas by cutting special education by almost 1/3, by eliminating the direct $9,000 for each special ed teacher, and substituting a formula Block Grant that can be spent for ANY purpose.
The Chicago special ed Block Grant is so bad EVERYONE wants to eliminate it, but now Manar wants to put a statewide Block Grant in its place?
Comment by winners and losers Monday, May 16, 16 @ 9:40 am
===Manar does not deserve that much credit.===
And yet… here you are continually trying to keep the discussion going on your thoughts on it, and others respond to your comments, and Manar continues to go around the state, and the discussion and tweaks and counters that never would have a forum to BE discussed… are now being discussed.
Your point has no point as you counter Manar’s work on his plan.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 16, 16 @ 9:47 am
JS Mill is making substantive points, and I am trying to do that.
It would be helpful if others join in.
Comment by winners and losers Monday, May 16, 16 @ 9:53 am
===…and I am trying to do that.===
… because Manar has been out, touting a plan, and you give no credit to him starting a discussion?
===Yes, Manar is Cullerton’s golden boy, and Manar has statewide ambitions.===
===substantive points,…===
That a substantive point?
Your righteous indignation is compelling…
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:02 am
@OW- with respect,
Manar claims to eliminate what is known as the Chicago Block Grant, even after changes that keep it going in everything but name.
48% of special education funding for students to CPS off of the top
37% of Early Childhood funding off the top (everyone else competes for funding through grant applications)
$261,000,000 for CPS attendance centers, to be distributed at CPS discretion.
There are a few more of these, but I think you get the picture.
Then, CPS runs through the formula like everyone else. There is a distinct sense that the CPS “double dip” continues.
I don’t but the “bailout” talk, it really does not bail them out of all of the trouble that CPS faces. But, it does water down the funds available for the formula.
I don’t object to lumping the funds together as some do. In my estimation this gives the ILGA fewer decisions to make, fewer options for under funding. Anytime you can take control away from the state that is a good thing.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:02 am
Rich Miller states in his column:
==Manar is Cullerton’s former chief of staff and Cullerton is helping him any way he can.==
==He’s essentially Cullerton’s golden boy.==
==He was on Chicago’s South Side just the other day, which produced smirks from some Republicans who believe he’s attempting to use this issue to advance his political career.==
Comment by winners and losers Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:06 am
- JS Mill -,
The plan? It’s ridiculously flawed in many areas. It’s also not going to be able to become law without significant gives, and a greater bargain along with some thoughtful compromise, probably more on Manar’s end, given he’s laid out the “start”
My point is the continued “dumping” and “Manar this”, or “Manar that”… but I’m about the formula.
The Senator has put himself out there, figuratively and actually, how about everyone look at the flaws and problems as the opening to get a plan, not the dead-ends, “Chicago bailout, plain and simple” nonsense coupled with throwing everything out, when some skeletal framing MAY be there(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:09 am
A real question: Is some skeletal framing there?
The SB 231 structure is based on weighting formulas that no one even discussed on the Floor of the Senate when SB 231 passed, as no one seems to know enough about them to even ask questions.
Comment by winners and losers Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:16 am
–We could wind up with no school funding at all.–
Not going to happen. No one can take the heat of schools not opening in the fall. Everyone on the ballot in November would get bounced, and rightfully so.
JS, thanks for the substantive insight.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:19 am
Many of the folks in the “wealthier” districts are not that wealthy. Many parents move into school districts they can barely afford so that their children can attend the best possible schools available to them, assuming that they can’t afford to pay for fancy private schools, such as the one attended by Mayor Rahm’s children. Manar’s proposal will squeeze even more out of these families, through the inevitable increase in their property taxes resulting from the proposal. This is not as simple as taking from the rich to give to the poor. Indeed, it could be construed as another sneak attack on the state’s shrinking middle class, for whom the state’s wealthier and more stable neighborhoods will become even less affordable.
Comment by Cassandra Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:34 am
@OW- I don’t buy the bailout nonsense either. I am not opposed to helping CPS. With more than 50,000 students I think something has to be done, just not in such a way as it hurts everyone else.
It has moved the conversation forward and forced many to engage. I give him credit for that.
I have been in the conversation directly with Manar. I have to say, that my gut and some of his responses have me convinced that his goal is less about a solution and more about positioning for bigger things politically. I have become a cynic though, I could be wrong.
The evidence based model is a true educational solution, but the fiscal cost will have most taking a pass I am afraid. The group that has been put together to review the EBM and funding is the most broadly representative that I have heard of. Unfortunately, I also hear the “Funding the Future” people are a real roadblock. They seem empowered to roll the dice with SB 231 since it really benefits them at a cost to others. I think that says a lot about their decision making if not their character.
I am tired of the politicians showing up at our schools for photo ops with our students. Honestly, it makes me sick. Locally, I do not have the authority to stop it. If we did, and spoke with one voice, we might get something done. But, school districts are scared and looking for a life raft anywhere they can. The school “reform movement” has been pretty active since the 1980’s and, since the new century started, they have ratcheted up there efforts to 11.
That assault from the “reformers” has been withering and many in my profession are just worn out and looking for the path of least resistance.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:34 am
If we wind up with no school funding, it will only enable the Rauner supporters who want him to ‘Shut down the state.’
Comment by Hedley Lamarr Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:44 am
- JS Mill -
Some really good stuff on this today. Thanks.
This is some good insight too…
===The school “reform movement” has been pretty active since the 1980’s and, since the new century started, they have ratcheted up there efforts to 11.
That assault from the “reformers” has been withering and many in my profession are just worn out and looking for the path of least resistance.===
The Manar Plan has ratcheted the discussions because numbers and formulas and substantive problems that exist in the plan allow those looking to dig in and fight, either way, their opportunities. The heaviest of lifts will be when the numbers actually get closer to “working” in the eyes of those willing to find an answer.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 16, 16 @ 10:52 am
Let me start by saying SB 231 as repeatedly amended along with prior versions of the so called Manar bill going back to the Quinn administration is not the brain child of either Senator Manar or President Cullerton. It was been drafted and redrafted by Advance Illinois by analysts supported by that organization, inclusive of SB 16 and SB 1 both of which were also repeatedly amended. The presumption of all these “Manar” bills is there will be no fundamental reform of our State’s dependency on property taxes to fund schools and that those districts mathematically deemed “wealthy” are not deserving of state funding even though their residents pay income taxes to our State.
Robin Steans in August 2013 laid out this vision clearly for Advance Illinois when in a speech before the Legislative Education Funding Advisory Committee stated: “With State funds limited, school districts rely on local property taxes to pay educators, buy instructional materials and keeps school districts open. School districts in affluent areas can raise more money, and do. School districts in impoverished areas can raise less.”
The crux of the Manar dilemma has been defining which district are “affluent,” at sufficient level to increase State funding for “impoverished” districts once State funding is removed. This game has not worked, and in order to quell the revolt various hold harmless provisions of limited durations were added which Senator Manar in February of 2015 said would cost a minimum of $500 million more a year.
Most recently Republicans have discovered that there was a CPS bail out component to SB 231, which existed in every version of the Manar bills. The problem is the CPS fiscal crisis needs to be addressed in a manner similar to 1979 when the Chicago School Finance Authority effective took fiscal control over CPS and created an independent bonding authority to bail the district out. The Manar bills don’t do that and pass money on to CPS that many people in our State believe will be wasted or as Pate Phillip once colorfully put it by “pouring money down a rat-hole.”
The Manar bill is deeply flawed and it is not that it’s just hard to reach agreement on K-12 funding. In order for any agreement to be reached CPS has to be put under an independent oversight authority that can within reason also raise the tax cap for the city and its pension debt taken out of the formula. Such oversight of CPS will result in austerity and the darlings of school reform, charter schools will feel that bite too. The demographics of Chicago are such that there are fewer and fewer families having children and remaining in the City, and there is less and less self interest in paying up for k-12 education. Some imposition of taxation will have to happen, hopefully it would rationally done.
Comment by Rod Monday, May 16, 16 @ 11:13 am
those high schooler coukd get trades jobs…. you inow the ones Rauner wants to remove the fair wage rates and drop the pay to min wage….. Rauner, brining IL to provide 3world wages and sweatshops for chinas growing middle class
Comment by Ghost Monday, May 16, 16 @ 12:18 pm
I have two kids in McLean County schools (LeRoy, which spends the least per student in the county) and here’s what I don’t understand. Why aren’t our local school officials getting on Manar’s bus? Andy shows time & time again that he will work with people. If you don’t like where Manar’s bus is headed, then get on and help him steer. Bring Andy here. Show Andy how much our kids do with how little. Standing to the side saying, well the evidence based model is better and not joining in the heavy lifting is BS. You’re going to get us all run over.
Comment by Rayne of Terror Monday, May 16, 16 @ 12:20 pm
Special Education funding should be paid separately from General State Aide. The way it is set up now the schools will get 33% less money to educate children who have special needs.
Comment by Mama Monday, May 16, 16 @ 12:35 pm