Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: “Wreck It Rauner” to attend State Fair
Next Post: Breen has new question on SB1
Posted in:
* Mark Brown on the SB1 talks…
Sen. Jason Barickman, R-Bloomington, said that if Illinois Democrats want Chicago Public Schools pension relief as part of an education funding reform deal, then they ought to agree to give other schools the same management “flexibility” accorded Chicago Public Schools two decades ago.
Management flexibility is code for limitations on union collective bargaining rights, so naturally, Democrats say they aren’t interested.
But it’s a difficult position for Democrats to defend, given that Chicago was already granted these same provisions as part of the deal under which Mayor Richard M. Daley took over the school system in 1995.
I can’t really defend it either. I understand why the unions don’t want to open the door any further than they already have, but it makes no sense for Chicago to be playing by its own set of labor rules, just as it makes no sense for Chicago to be the only school district that pays for its own pensions.
“One of the abilities is for Chicago to use third-party contractors for the provision of non-instructional services, whether it be safety, grounds keeping, landscaping or the like,” Barickman said.
The privatization of such services was not without its bumps at CPS, and many would say those third-party contractors continue to be a problem.
Thoughts?
* Meanwhile, Gov. Rauner told reporters this yesterday…
If a school district has dramatically fewer students, it’s not fair to other districts that have more students or the same where their dollars keep flowing to fund half the number of students or a third of the number of students. at some point you need to sort of true it up and adjust it or it’s not fair to the taxpayers in other communities. I’m open to when that adjustment happens. And for the time being have a hold harmless so even if there’s enrollment drops that the school district can keep getting the same amount of money from the state. But some day there needs to be some sort of adjustment, otherwise it’s not fair or sustainable over time.
If he’d settle for limiting the funding cuts to school districts which lose half or two-thirds of their students, then fine because it’ll probably never happen or it’ll be so rare that it’s no big deal. What he may be implying, though, is that he really believes his private school tuition tax credit idea will prompt tons of kids to move away from public schools. What he is also doing, however, is trying to get at CPS funding. Call his bluff.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:13 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: “Wreck It Rauner” to attend State Fair
Next Post: Breen has new question on SB1
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Fair is fair is fair. This makes too much sense so of course it will never happen.
I also wonder how much something like CPS’s “management flexibility” plays into the CPS employment numbers that were reported here last week.
Comment by Curl of the Burl Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:17 am
Earlier in the week, many comments centered around the disdain of some downstate folks towards Chicago. Are these some of the reasons?
Comment by Blue dog dem Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:17 am
doubling down on a bad idea does not make it a fair compromise.
the wealthy are wageing war on the middle class, they want their wages so they can become even richer. The first step isnto get rid of union jobs so they can pay lower wages.
our economy need middle class families spending miney on houses, cars, food, clothes, TVs etc to thrive. This race tonhabe as many poor people as possible while reducing the workers with income to spend is a race to the destruction of our economy. its never a good plan.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:20 am
Personally I question whether CPS should have those “rights” so no, I don’t think Democrats should make the deal. There’s a cognitive dissonance there, where Republicans say regulations stunt economic growth and harm the MIDDLE CLASS - they mean rich business owners but that’s a less popular opinion - so we should deregulate and let the market do what it will, but at the same time they want to bust unions, which is mostly made out of blue collar, middle class families. Hard to reconcile the two.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:24 am
Their statement make political sense, but fails every other sense. They have their lies sounding like logic to their supporters, finally.
Problem is - these mopes are just wrong and too devious. They aren’t being honest. Their reforms aren’t helping anyone but their anti-union paranoid friends. There is something creepy about Rauner’s hatred of all citizens in unions. It’s mental.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:25 am
So Rauner thinks CPS is corrupt and mismanaged and every district in the state should be just like it?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:27 am
Which is it Barickman? SB1 is inherently unfair or fails to deliver enough T.A.?
Comment by wondering Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:28 am
Why do downstate people despise Chicago? Simply, because they play by different rules. The violence, the corruption, the dollars-in vs. dollars-out map posted the other day, those are all expressions of the belief (read: truth) that Chicago is playing a different game than the rest of the state.
Now, can you argue that because it’s the economic, cultural, political and population center of the state that it should get special provisions? Maybe. And let’s have a well-reasoned debate. But that never truly occurs. If Chicago wants equality, then it should operate under the same guidelines as every single other city and county in Illinois. If not, then don’t be surprised when the collective rage turns against it.
Comment by DownstateKid Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:29 am
==makes no sense for Chicago to be playing by its own set of labor rules, just as it makes no sense for Chicago to be the only school district that pays for its own pensions.==
They want equality?
Since the state (and the city of Chicago) pay for all teacher pensions, Chicago should be included in that deal.
Privatization of third-party services has been a disaster. (You want Aramark cleaning your school?) End that provision for CPS.
Then we’ll have equality.
Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:36 am
===Since the state (and the city of Chicago) pay for all teacher pensions, Chicago should be included in that deal.==
Except that CTU fights night and tooth to keep the pensions separate from the state.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:38 am
==they ought to agree to give other schools the same management flexibility==
It’s cute to see Barickman out there negotiatin’ after being pantsed by Rauner two weeks ago.
Comment by Jocko Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:39 am
It sounds like an absolutely fair trade to me. Give and take, and everyone ends up on a more equal footing.
Comment by Skirmisher Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:42 am
DK, your spin is tortured and hilarious.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone Downstate express antipathy toward Chicago for that word salad of nouns you jumbled together under the banner “different rules.”
Seriously, “violence” is a “different set of rules?”
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:42 am
Thoughts?
1) Doesn’t anyone on the ILGOP side understand process?
2) It’s too late in the process; the AV has to be affirmed or overridden as is.
3) If neither happens and a new bill is ran, then you can start horsetrading for votes.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:43 am
== part of the deal ==
That’s a little bit of a stretch.
Most of those collective bargaining rules were imposed by the Republican majority as a shot against CTU in the 1995 school reform law (the same law that screwed up the Chicago teachers pension fund and created the now reviled CPS block grant.) Every Chicago member of the General Assembly voted against that bill — so I don’t think they felt like Chicago was being treated to “special” treatment.
Barickman’s Republican predecessors could have imposed those same collective bargaining restrictions on all their school districts at the time, but didn’t. Why?
Comment by BC Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:49 am
== the dollars-in vs. dollars-out map posted the other day ==
DownstateKid, did you see a different map than I did?
Comment by Roman Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:52 am
=== But some day there needs to be some sort of adjustment, otherwise it’s not fair or sustainable over time. ===
Rich -
There is an adjustment that occurs over time, and I guess someone needs to point that out to Bruce Rauner.
As you increase General State Aid and raise per pupil funding to the level it is supposed to be, the Hold Harmless gets smaller and smaller.
I suspect that if we were actually funding education at the EFAB-recommended amount, the funding formula devised under SB 1 would not require a hold harmless.
That is a good Ralph Martire question.
@RNUG -
Regarding 2), I believe he governor has the latitude to decree that any amendment conforms to his AV. If he decides certain elements are not needed, he can ignore that.
Comment by Free Set of Steak Knives Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:53 am
Tell JumpinJason “no thanks” and have another brainstorm
Comment by Annonin' Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:59 am
- DownstateKid -
East St. Louis, Rockford, Danville and Springfield all have higher violent crime rates than Chicago. And according to the chart you mentioned, each of those town’s home counties gets much more per capita funding from the state than Cook does.
Do the downstate folks you talk to “despise” those cities, too?
I’m gonna guess they probably despise East St. Louis. Mentioning that city’s name likely has the same dog whistle effect that mentioning “Chicago” does with your crowd.
Comment by Roman Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:04 am
- DownstateKid -
Maybe you’d like equity where Chicago takes back every dollar it sends to Springfield?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:09 am
==Except that CTU fights night and tooth to keep the pensions separate from the state.==
CPS pension fund’s in better shape despite the 1995 state law allowing the mayor to loot it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that the state is doing make-up payments to TRS to make up for past underfunding…is it offering the same deal to CPS?
Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:13 am
This would be a fine offer if Rauner had simply removed the CPS pension money with his AV. But he didn’t do that, did he? Bruce Rauner was the one who decided to make CPS pension money a permanent part of state law, and went for TIF district changes instead.
In three or four years when downstate schools in TIF zones start losing money as a direct consequence of this AV, will Barickman or any of these other mopes have the stones to admit they sold out their school districts because they were afraid to lose out on that sweet Rauner campaign cash?
Comment by Lester Holt's Mustache Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:16 am
How about tossing in another reform for all districts–join 41 other states and ban the right to strike for teachers. Binding labor arbitration instead. If it’s good enough for our first responders–policeman and firemen–it should be good enough for teachers.
Why should parents be held hostage every school year when a fair, independent labor arbitration process can decide a contract if the two sides can’t agree.
Plus, it creates an incentive for the sides to come to an agreement, since neither side can be certain of the result in arbitration.
Comment by Parents First Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:19 am
The Democrats should be against it because it hasn’t worked for CPS. If anything, the Dems should be fighting to get CPS back to how the rest of the state has it.
Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:49 am
Dear All of Downstate (and DK),
Repeat after me: The rest of Illinois would be much worse off without Chicago.
Again.
The rest of Illinois would be much worse off without Chicago.
XOXO,
‘Dale
Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:52 am
If the hold harmless is set at an absolute dollar amount, inflation will take care of declining enrollment adjustments. The same $1M today is worth only 90% in 4 years, 80% in 9 years, 70% in 14 years, etc. Only schools with an enrollment drop more than 20% in a decade would get more than they might deserve (by a relatively modest amount), and even then it would eventually correct itself given another decade or two.
Compounding interest…sometimes it helps.
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:55 am
The education bill that Rauner vetoed did not give Chicago money to bail out their Teachers’ Pension Fund. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Rauner vetoed the education bill because he wants to privatize Chicago Public Schools first, & then the rest of the state later.
Comment by Mama Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 10:57 am
It is my understanding that privatization of public schools in other states is not working well, but then that doesn’t matter as much as saving taxes for the 2%ers.
Comment by Mama Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 11:01 am
Mama everything private is better:
Investment banking is private and is was a boon to the world in 2008
Amerin is Private and power is only 2-3 times the cost from public utilties like CWLP.
Drug prices are controlled by prvt business, like Rsuner who bought up meds for 20 a pill and taised them to 1,500.
Private is better
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:29 pm
===If the hold harmless is set at an absolute dollar amount, inflation will take care of declining enrollment adjustments.
Exactly. If you want a trigger in there for some extreme loss fine, but you might think a financial genius could understand inflation.
Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 3:13 pm
The better thing to do would be to reverse the 1995 law as it pertains to Chicago. Restrict the CPS right to privatize. Their efforts in that regard. The services cost more than they did when performed by CPS employees and the results are terrible. Schools are filthier - rat droppings in kindergarten classrooms are only the start of the list.
The only benefit is the money going into the pockets of political contributors
Comment by truthbetold Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 3:53 pm