tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post2507725117455766491..comments2024-03-28T23:38:22.511-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Tuesday Open ThreadMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-33408768793139391092019-01-21T16:58:27.839-08:002019-01-21T16:58:27.839-08:00Historian, that is true but is it included with K-...Historian, that is true but is it included with K-12 spending? I don't think so.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-81733372775275753892019-01-21T16:57:46.497-08:002019-01-21T16:57:46.497-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30460817719470794222019-01-21T11:20:47.061-08:002019-01-21T11:20:47.061-08:00The definition of basic education was EXPANDED- no...The definition of basic education was EXPANDED- not narrowed- to include prek. 15,000 Washington state children now receive prek.Historiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-85312048991131874052019-01-20T12:48:39.618-08:002019-01-20T12:48:39.618-08:00SPS Staff, where does one find the FIOA SPS reques...SPS Staff, where does one find the FIOA SPS request log? I find lots of information under Public Records Requests but no access to a list of requests that have been made.<br />SeattleliferAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-28005734795362500262019-01-19T10:44:51.238-08:002019-01-19T10:44:51.238-08:00There's a huge abuse coverup going on in SPS. ...There's a huge abuse coverup going on in SPS. We should expect news to break next week.<br /><br />check the FIOA SPS request log for details.<br /><br />SPS StaffAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-37357517859576927832019-01-19T10:40:24.558-08:002019-01-19T10:40:24.558-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-84264148826950850142019-01-18T22:05:28.094-08:002019-01-18T22:05:28.094-08:00Paraeducators across the state (290 districts) are...Paraeducators across the state (290 districts) are organizing. <br /><br />"Kennewick School District paraeducators have approved a new pay agreement with the school district, avoiding a possible strike.<br />The deal gives them an 8 percent raise this school year, retroactive to Sept. 1, plus an additional 1.5 percent increase for longevity.<br />It also provides for a 4.1 percent increase next school year, plus a similar longevity bump."<br /><br />Read more here: https://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/local/article224682920.html#storylink=cpy<br /><br />Issaquah negotiations broke down. They are going on strike. https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/issaquah-school-district-staff-members-will-hold-strike-vote-tuesday-night/904969114<br /><br /><br /><br />WEA Swipenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-74223257812010701112019-01-18T19:18:48.744-08:002019-01-18T19:18:48.744-08:00Because some districts used levy money for things ...Because some districts used levy money for things that the state should have covered and some districts could not cover those things was what drove the McCleary litigation and decision. <br /><br />If the local levy dollars are used for things that should be covered by the state, a local taxpayer could challengenge that use. <br /><br />McCleary was not a good decision if you value education and live in Seattle. <br /><br />The legislature gets to define “basic education.” A court challenge to that definition would probably fail. <br /><br />Seattle passes levies. But that was not always the case. It may not be the case sometime in the future. But the Seattle School District case from 1977 and the McCleary decision enshrines the right of students to have a state funded “basic education.”Judgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-18341824350682385902019-01-18T15:39:07.661-08:002019-01-18T15:39:07.661-08:00Issaquah workers just voted to go out on strike.&q...Issaquah workers just voted to go out on strike."<br /><br />What does that mean? Teachers? Staff? Please be clearer on statements like this.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-81755597595619176212019-01-18T15:23:04.013-08:002019-01-18T15:23:04.013-08:00WEA didn't give a damn about the levy cliff. T...WEA didn't give a damn about the levy cliff. They swept across the state and demanded raises between 10%-20%. They knew- full well- that the state provided approximately 5%-10% for teacher raises. We're now seeing the fall out. <br /><br />The state still has to fund $4B for McCleary and $3.5B in pension benefits. A capital gains tax will bring in approximately $1B and will be challenged in court. The $1B will cover expected benefit packages- this year.<br /><br />Issaquah workers just voted to go out on strike.<br /><br />I see a lot of desire, but not a lot of funding. Don't expect Bezos, Gates or any other billionaires to be your savior. It will never happen.WEA Swipenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-34406218075368670932019-01-18T15:06:37.621-08:002019-01-18T15:06:37.621-08:00Melissa is right that "the real issue is the ...Melissa is right that "the real issue is the legislature's ridiculous definition of "basic education."" The Seattle Times is engaging in a disinformation campaign to suggest to readers that levies cannot be used for anything other than "extras" like music and sports. That is totally and utterly false. "Basic education" is a narrow and legalistic definition, not the common-sense definition we might all have. It means that if SPS wants more than 9 nurses for the entire district, or wants class sizes smaller than 45, it has to pay for it by itself. There is an avalanche of misinformation out there and it's clearly a deliberate effort by corporate ed reformers to crush our public schools.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-11439180177087991612019-01-18T14:59:57.833-08:002019-01-18T14:59:57.833-08:00No, the Supreme Court has never struck down local ...No, the Supreme Court has never struck down local levies for paying for things. They have instead ordered *the state* to fully fund "basic education". And they allowed the state to narrowly define what "basic education" is - leaving a huge gap for SPS to fill. If the SPS levy fails, there could be 1100 layoffs and SPS would lose 22% of its budget. Is that what you want?Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-1444117697977277322019-01-18T14:59:52.413-08:002019-01-18T14:59:52.413-08:00"McCleary simply needs time to be implemented..."McCleary simply needs time to be implemented to keep focus on state funding.."<br /><br />Oh the old, "let's wait and see" when we can clearly see what is coming.<br /><br />The "voter's" (don't know why Carlyle keeps writing that) did vote for the City's education levy. Why is that okay to pass (and raise property taxes because it, too, is an increase in amount asked of voters) but not the district's? <br /><br />"There is ample evidence this model doesn't work from districts across the state - large and small, urban and rural, east and west."<br /><br />Robert is right that this is a very important point. I see some trying to make it all about Seattle when 1) it's not and 2) all the property tax that Seattle collects under McCleary does NOT stay here.<br /><br />I agree, Carlyle is playing a dangerous game but he's a grown-ass legislator so we'll see. <br /><br />Judge, and yet districts did use the money beyond "enrichment programs." Since 1978. Go figure.<br /><br />And the problem, Your Honor, is that there are those of us not willing to wait to see what the fallout is. Not willing to see this district fall to its knees. And not willing for our district to have to take the time and money to go to court. <br /><br />I think the real issue is the legislature's ridiculous definition of "basic education." <br /><br />I give SPS credit for fighting back on the enactment of McCleary in the manner that the legislature did.<br /><br />Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-21212106873176541782019-01-18T14:46:12.617-08:002019-01-18T14:46:12.617-08:00The Supreme Court said that local levies are uncon...The Supreme Court said that local levies are unconstitutional when used for anything beyond “enrichment programs.” Seattle School District v State (1978)<br /><br />That case is interesting because it arose after Seattle failed to pass two levies. The District sued the state and said, look, it’s the state’s duty to fund this stuff. The court agreed. <br /><br />If the state is failing to fund basic education the remedy would be to sue the state, not pass what may well be an unconstitutional local levy<br /><br />McCleary reinforced the earlier decision. The burden on paying for basic education is now on the state. <br />Judgenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-15670597241850734402019-01-18T14:09:19.549-08:002019-01-18T14:09:19.549-08:00Carlyle is wrong about most of these points. First...Carlyle is wrong about most of these points. First, if he voted against this new model, why should we be cautious in changing it, especially given how badly it shortchanges his own constituents? The model was a Republican proposal that Democrats caved to accept in order to avoid a state government shutdown in the summer of 2017. There is ample evidence this model doesn't work from districts across the state - large and small, urban and rural, east and west. <br /><br />Second, Seattle is not asking for anything unprecedented - they always ask for more levy authority than they can collect. (Did Carlyle hand this talking point to the Times so they could use it to attack the levy? One wonders.)<br /><br />Why is "maintaining the highest local levy rate plus new state funding" challenging? For whom is it challenging - for legislators who don't want to piss off billionaires and large corporations? What about the students and teachers who are suffering the results of this spending cap? And does Carlyle really believe that Seattle schools should take a 22% budget cut that would result from rejecting the levy? Is he going to defend that to his constituents? I know he just got re-elected and probably thinks he's insulated from voter anger, but if SPS's levy fails Carlyle will take some of the blame and I think the fallout will be ugly.<br /><br />He also seems to pit the city's Families and Education Levy against the SPS levy when he writes "property taxes have doubled in Seattle in 5 years and effectively overturning the planned local levy reduction is troubling especially when voter's approved children and education levy" - does he really think that the FEL means we should reject the SPS levy? And if the SPS operations levy fails, that guarantees the failure of everything the FEL is trying to fund.<br /><br />Carlyle then says "Seattle's pre-McCleary per student funding in 2012 was $8,560 and post-McCleary in 2019 is $12,000. Policy debate should look at that core number and figure out what's right for all kids in WA." No, the policy debate should look at what is the need for each student and each district and make sure everyone has *ample* funding. And his choice of date is revealing given that 2012 is after the recession cuts. Why not compare 2019 to 2009 or 2005?<br /><br />Ultimately Carlyle has to answer to parents in his district. If he thinks we're going to be OK with him tanking the SPS levy he has another thing coming.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-41969129458838288372019-01-18T12:38:38.098-08:002019-01-18T12:38:38.098-08:00The legislature- not the court- determines the law...The legislature- not the court- determines the law. Courts simply interpret the law. Issues of levy caps and definitions of basic education belong the state legislature.<br /><br />I don't believe anyone wants the levy to be voted down. I do believe there are other levy issues that need to be addressed Washington Paramount Duty could report on Carlyle's ACTUAL words and refrain from articulating perceived intentions.<br /><br />Here is what Carlyle had to say:<br /><br />"Please note that I voted against the McCleary deal. However, it passed and we now have a state centric system and thus need to be cautious about already changing the new model and ensure local levies are modest and used for enhancements not what is actually basic education. 1) state's obligation to fund 'basic education' is critical including special ed, etc. and I don't want to distract and effectively shift obligation back to locals; 2) Seattle is asking for an unprecedented local levy authority of 98% ABOVE current law which I fear could cause a backlash in Olympia even if voter's approve. There is some room for modification in levy rate deal that was punitive to Puget Sound area but maintaining the highest local levy rate plus new state funding is challenging. McCleary simply needs time to be implemented to keep focus on state funding; 3) property taxes have doubled in Seattle in 5 years and effectively overturning the planned local levy reduction is troubling especially when voter's approved children and education levy; 4) Seattle's pre-McCleary per student funding in 2012 was $8,560 and post-McCleary in 2019 is $12,000. Policy debate should look at that core number and figure out what's right for all kids in WA. Keep up the advocacy and let's all continue to figure it out together."<br /><br /><br />Carlyle has some legitimate points.<br /><br /><br /><br />Another Namenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-65624867977318704882019-01-18T10:16:24.603-08:002019-01-18T10:16:24.603-08:00Or, if you don't want to read four paragraphs ...Or, if you don't want to read four paragraphs from me, just watch this excellent video from ESD 112 in Vancouver, WA that explains this pretty well: https://www.facebook.com/ESD112/videos/332080134309170/Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-72625690872976711982019-01-18T09:39:58.411-08:002019-01-18T09:39:58.411-08:00The McCleary case was about the inadequacy of stat...The McCleary case was about the inadequacy of state funding. The Supreme Court never said that local levies were unconstitutional or that they needed to be capped. The Supreme Court instead said the state needed to cover all the costs of basic education. The state was the one acting unconstitutionally, not districts. The legislature provided a very narrow definition of basic education that does absurd things like give SPS enough money for a nurse at 9 out of 100 schools, and doesn't fully fund textbooks or special education and other items, and got the Court to agree that was OK. But that does not mean basic education at our schools has been fully funded.<br /><br />Further, the Court rejected the idea Yawn is proposing that somehow districts need to have money taken away from them. There's nothing equitable about that. Equity, especially in the McCleary case, was about adding more money into the system. WPD has always argued that all schools need more money, and some schools need a lot more money. For example, one might say Ballard HS needs $2000 more per student, but RBHS needs $8000 more per student. (Numbers aren't precise and are intended to illustrate the larger concept.) But the actual legislative response to the Court in 2017 created a bunch of new inequities and made matters worse. So that needs to be fixed and more money from the state is key.<br /><br />This is what the Seattle Times and Reuven Carlyle are trying to prevent - they don't want taxes to go up so they are fighting as hard as they can to keep public school spending capped, even though that cap is below the amount needed to actually run a modern school district and educate kids.<br /><br />What the Times is also trying to do is tell Seattle liberals that in order to have statewide equity, we have to vote down our local levy and cause a massive crisis for SPS that will include mass layoffs of as many as 1100 people, mostly teachers, with huge cuts to programs and skyrocketing class sizes. That argument is absurd on its face. Seattle needs to pass its local levy, especially as a failure would be extremely inequitable. And then we all need to continue pressing our legislators - especially Reuven Carlyle - to add billions more in funding for our public schools. They can start by adopting Inslee's capital gains tax.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-42253478123472542292019-01-17T16:48:08.150-08:002019-01-17T16:48:08.150-08:00McCleary was based on inequity. Nothing has change...McCleary was based on inequity. Nothing has changed.Yawnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-45326628888535725042019-01-17T16:23:41.719-08:002019-01-17T16:23:41.719-08:00Maybe, just maybe, people in Aberdeen or strugglin...Maybe, just maybe, people in Aberdeen or struggling communities don't have the capacity to tax themselves. Maybe??Yawnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-22964348163540583652019-01-17T16:01:30.948-08:002019-01-17T16:01:30.948-08:00Yawn, you have a pretty weird definition of equity...Yawn, you have a pretty weird definition of equity. It doesn't mean that you have to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator. It can also mean that you raise all boats. It isn't just Seattle that has state funding 1 nurse per 5000-7000 students. Fixing that for one group fixes it for everyone. I would love for that (and other glaring issues) be fixed statewide. If the state can't do it, then we go to Plan B. <br /><br />Having Seattle have a higher allowable levy rate is somewhat inequitable. On the other hand, every district in the state could have that if they were willing to tax themselves for it.<br /><br />Reuven Carlyle is my state senator. I'll have to make contact with him. Eric Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-45051583149209092902019-01-17T14:49:41.324-08:002019-01-17T14:49:41.324-08:00I received my information from State Senator Reuve...I received my information from State Senator Reuven Carlyle. The Governor and OSPI seek to raise levy funding to 22%-28%. This is great for wealthy areas. Poor rural areas of the state will suffer.<br /><br />Equity means Seattle will see less funding. It is that simple, unless you want to create funding imbalances throughout the state.Yawnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-33568310167537758202019-01-17T11:14:37.236-08:002019-01-17T11:14:37.236-08:00Yawn, care to share where you saw those numbers an...Yawn, care to share where you saw those numbers and what the backup information is?<br /><br />Now, I do tink it's true that SPS and WPD are mustache-twirling villains. Their secret plan? Getting the state to fund more than one school nurse per 5000-7000 students. Those dastards!Eric Bnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-54208645902218370712019-01-16T21:03:48.115-08:002019-01-16T21:03:48.115-08:00Washington Paramount Duty claims that SPS's le...Washington Paramount Duty claims that SPS's levy will reduce class size. I don't think so because state funding must pay for teachers.<br /><br />It is time for Washington Paramount Duty and SPS to be honest. They are trying to help the state create a funding imbalance.<br /><br />I've seen two figures. One figure claims SPS is asking for 50% above current levy limits and another claims that SPS is asking for 98% above current state levy limit.<br /><br />Yawnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-73010854537976251012019-01-16T20:29:34.772-08:002019-01-16T20:29:34.772-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com