2/22/2010
While I consider myself lucky that I was able to keep busy doing freelance consulting and contract work for over 5 years, the economic downturn finally caught up with me in November when there were no more promising contract jobs on the horizon. Fortunately, I was able to land a 4 month job working as a UX Devigner (combination of developer and designer) on the Microsoft Suface team, prototyping new user interfaces for the shell in WPF.
Frankly, it's a bit of a shock for me to go back to working 9 to 5 on-site, and I realize now how spoiled I've been. However, we're doing some fanstastic work and I love being back on Microsoft campus. 2/4/2010
With our focus on state politics in Olympia, it’s easy to forget that more and more of our education policy is now being decided in the other Washington. I just returned from NSBA’s Federal Relations Network conference in Washington D.C., where we were briefed by Secretary Duncan and met with key members of Congress. Here are three of the most important messages we were sending on the hill:
1. Reauthorize ESEA!
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (a.k.a. "No Child Left Behind") has made great strides in accountability, measuring annual student progress in math and reading in every school across the nation. However, it’s punitive measures to turn around schools not meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) have proven counterproductive and desperately need to be updated based on what we’ve learned since 2001. Currently, half of our districts in Washington state are in some form of "Improvement Status" and have Title 1 funding set aside to provide for transporting students to other schools…funding that won’t be returned if it’s not used. By 2014, the goals ratchet to 100%, ensuring that all schools are failing AYP and we have no easy means to identify the schools that really need help.
- Make AYP based on year-to-year growth, not absolute values. If test scores show a school is providing 2 year’s worth of improvement in one year, that program is working and should be celebrated, even if they’re starting with disadvantaged kids that are 3 years behind the national average. Eventually, they will close the gap.
- Broaden tests to include assessments of more than just math and reading. At a minimum, we need to evaluate science (promised, but not delivered) and writing (like the new SAT), but ideally this would include multiple measures of academic achievement reflecting the kind of well-rounded education necessary to be successful in a 21st century economy.
- Sanctions should only apply to schools and districts when the same subgroup fails to make AYP in the same subject for two consecutive years or more.
- Sanctions should be aligned with the need for improvement, targeting only the subgroup that fails to make AYP instead of the entire student population (many of whom end up transferring to schools with lower performance for their subgroup).
- Students belonging to multiple subgroups should be counted in each group as an equal fraction, totaling one student towards AYP.
2. Fully fund 40% share of IDEA!
Currently, Washington school districts spend an average of 8% of their local levy dollars backfilling unfunded requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, totaling $160M per year statewide. The federal government currently funds 17.2% of their promised 40%, resulting in a yearly national shortfall of $16B and a whopping total of $670B since its inception.
- Co-sponsor EDUCATE Act (H.R. 3578) and IDEA Full Funding Act (S.1652)
- If federal funds aren’t available, reduce local Maintenance of Effort requirements
3. Teachers and students are our most leveraged investment!
Thanks to the federal stimulus grants from last year, Washington state only lost 2,700 teachers. Without that safety net, things would have been much worse…and this year OSPI estimates that we’ll be losing 8,000 teachers due to budget cuts during this short session. Like jobs saved at Boeing and Microsoft, when we save a teacher’s job there are trickle down effects to the community that multiply its impact on Main Street. In addition, any investment we make in education at least prepares future generations to ultimately pay back the federal debt we’re incurring.
- Support the Jobs for Main Street Act, which provides a $23B Education Jobs Fund. (Senate version is pending, estimated at $18B for education.)
- Remember that the best jobs and anti-poverty program is a world-class education.
Please contact your U.S. Senators and local House representative to ensure they get these messages. With the President’s budget released, debates ensuing in both House and Senate, and new proposals being released daily from the Department of Education, now is the time to ensure those representing us in D.C. know where our priorities lie. 1/27/2010So I drove down to Olympia today to testify on a couple of school levy bills…and ended up unexpectedly flogging the Superintendent of Schools on public TV for retreating on math and science graduation requirements, lowering standards and delaying testing by 2 and 4 years, respectively.
Click here to see the KOMO News footage.
Update: This bill was ultimately defeated, and OSPI has stepped up to deliver the first end-of-course math assessments in Spring 2011. 11/21/2009
This week at the Washington State School Directors' Association conference in Seattle I was elected to the Legislative Committee, representing King County. I was also appointed to the NSBA Federal Relations Network as Coordinating Member for Congressional District 8. I'll be attending the FRN conference at the end of January along with my 10-year old son Duncan. (Aren't Alaska $50 companion fare coupons great?) We're looking forward to exploring our nation's capitol together in addition to meeting with our representatives in D.C. to discuss priorities for reauthorization of ESEA (a.k.a. No Child Left Behind), federal education stimulus programs, core standards and assessments, and other initiatives for education reform.
11/4/2009
Well, the election results are now final. Out of 56,804 registered voters in the Issaquah School District, almost exactly 50% (28,329) cast their ballots in this election. Of those, only about 61% (17,420) actually made it far enough down the ballot to vote for my position, but I managed 99% of those votes.
With an uncontested race, I suppose that's about par for the course. However, there were 180 voters who submitted write-ins, which doesn't sit well with me. It reminds me that there's always more work to do. 10/15/2009
According to the Voters’ Pamphlet, Initiative 1033 is a measure that would “limit growth of certain state, county and city revenue to annual inflation and population growth, not including voter approved revenue increases. Revenue collected above the limit would reduce property tax levies.” For fiscal conservatives like me who believe in limited constitutional government and have been regularly frustrated with the inability of lawmakers to live within their means, the intent of this measure seems quite laudable.
After spending weeks researching I-1033, I still support its intent and even better understand its popular support.
Consider that during Governor Gregoire’s first term state spending increased 33%. That’s an increase of over 8% per year even though inflation and population growth averaged about 3%. The result: the inflation-corrected tax burden on the average citizen increased about 5% per year without their consent. It’s not surprising that voters now don’t trust Olympia to show spending restraint of their own volition. During periods of rapid revenue growth lawmakers will spend the extra revenue because it garners support from beneficiaries, and during periods of revenue decline they look to tax increases to cover shortfalls. So left to its own devices, government seems to grow until the taxpayers force restraint.
So why not support Initiaitive 1033? Unfortunately, it's execution is fundamentally flawed. Specifically:
- The formula for the revenue growth limit is too simplistic. The Office of Financial Management forecasts state revenue based on the change in real per capita personal income plus change in inflation plus change in population, adjusted for revenue elasticity, while I-1033 only considers inflation and population growth. So if average inflation-adjusted incomes go up due to productivity improvements (which they have for centuries), then the revenue growth limit creates a growing inequity between salaries in manufacturing and government service.
- The “Ratchet Effect” leads to significant reductions in service over time. During tough economic times (like now) we may have the I-1033 authority to raise more revenue, but still have a significant shortfall because of tax revenue elasticity. When the economy eventually recovers, revenue cannot rise back to pre-recession levels without a referendum because growth is based on the previous year only. So over time, natural economic cycles lead to lower and lower inflation-adjusted per capita tax revenues.
- The “Reverse Robin Hood Effect” redistributes sales tax revenues to land owners. Despite the fact that property taxes only constitute 10% of revenue to the State General Fund, any revenue collected above the limit will be used only to reduce property tax levies. Sales and use taxes are already considered regressive, but with I-1033 we’d be effectively redistributing those funds to unfairly reward property owners.
So what actual evidence do we have of how I-1033 will impact government services like public education?
Well, in 1992 Colorado became the only state in the nation to impose a revenue limit like the one in I-1033. During the years that followed Colorado’s per-pupil funding for K-12 education plummeted to 49th in the nation, even despite provisions to earmark surplus revenues for educational improvements and an adequate rainy-day fund before reducing property tax levies. In 2000, an amendment was passed requiring education spending to increase at a certain rate regardless of revenue, and lead to a greater portion of revenue devoted to education. However, the revenue growth limit required that other cuts in spending be made to offset education increases, and many of these cuts were unpopular. By 2005 the budgeting process got so paralyzed and convoluted that Colorado voters—led by a bipartisan coalition of business leaders, teachers, seniors, healthcare providers and firefighters—voted to suspend the law for five years to stop the deterioration of their state.
My conclusion is that despite it's good intentions, the flawed implementation of I-1033 will cause substantial harm to our state. I don’t believe education reform needs to come hand-in-hand with larger government and higher taxes, but the political reality is that passage of this measure would be a significant barrier to enactment of the basic education reform initiatives that we so boldly began last legislative session. As much as I’d love a property tax rebate, preparing future generations to better compete in our global 21st century workplace is much more critical to our long-term success as a state and a nation.
Please vote NO on Initiative 1033. 10/6/2009
Here are some great opportunities for you to meet each of our ISD School Board candidates:
Thursday, Oct 8th: Issaquah Press Candidate Forum, City Hall South on Sunset Way, 7pm-9:30pm. The forum will be rebroadcast on Issaquah Channel 21 every Friday, Sunday and Tuesday at 7 a.m., noon and 9 p.m. until Election Day, Nov. 3.
Monday, Oct 12th: PTSA Candidate Forum, Pacific Cascade Freshman Campus, 6:30pm Meet-n-Greet, 7pm-8pm. At the forum, council members will ask questions of the candidates. Then, audience members will have the opportunity to pose questions. Tuesday, Oct 13th: Issaquah Chapter Action hosted by Stand for Children at Jody Mull's 6061 167th Ave SE, Bellevue 98006 (Montreaux). 10am-11am. The Issaquah Strategy Team endorsed Marnie Maraldo after a thorough interview process with her and her opponent. The Team also endorsed uncontested candidate Chad Magendanz. Tuesday, Oct 13th: PTSA Candidate Meet and Greet, Liberty High School Room 121, 7:30pm-8:30pm. Each candidate will have an opportunity to speak, and then will take questions from the public in an informal setting. 6/12/2009
Here's a partial list of community leaders who have endorsed my campaign for the Issaquah School Board. It’s still early, so the list grows daily.
Connie Fletcher
Director, Issaquah School Board
Past President, Washington State School Directors Association
Larry Ishmael
Chairman, Issaquah Chamber of Commerce
Past President, Issaquah School Board
Mary Scott
Past President, Issaquah School Board
Ava Frisinger
Mayor, City of Issaquah
Eileen Barber
Council Member, City of Issaquah
Fred Butler
Council Member, City of Issaquah
Past Mayor, City of Issaquah
Rowan Hinds
Past Mayor, City of Issaquah
Judy Rogers
President, Kiwanis Club of Issaquah
Retired Teacher
Nancy Campi
Co-President, Issaquah PTSA Council
Past President, Issaquah High School PTSA
Alison Meryweather
Co-president, Issaquah PTSA Council
Past President, Clark Elementary PTA
Kelly Munn
State Field Director, League of Education Voters
Past Co-President, Issaquah PTSA Council
Past Co-Chair, Issaquah School Bond/Levy Campaign Committee
Past Region 2 Legislative Advocate, Washington State PTA
Lisa Macfarlane
Director of External Affairs & President Emeritus, League of Education Voters
Leigh Stokes
Co-President, Skyline High School PTSA
Past Co-President, Issaquah PTSA Council
Team Leader, Issaquah Stand for Children
Jody Mull
Co-President, Issaquah High School PTSA
President Elect, Issaquah Schools Foundation
Team Leader, Issaquah Stand for Children
Marianne Kersten
Team Leader, Issaquah Stand for Children
Past President, Issaquah High School PTSA
Past Chair, Volunteers for Issaquah Schools
Gretchen Dowling
President, Clark Elementary PTA
It’s important to note that while I’ve provided some context on current or past positions that these are only personal endorsements and don’t reflect official endorsements of their organizations. Those organizations that do have 501.(c)(4) status (and can therefore engage in political campaign activity) will typically issue endorsements closer to the election, and usually based on a battery of interviews and questionnaires. 6/5/2009
Despite assessments that show national test scores consistently declining among industrialized nations, the Issaquah School District has been adopting higher graduation requirements, achieving some of the best standardized test scores in our state, and providing more 21st century skills that prepare students for success in college and careers…all while receiving $11.6M/yr less in per-student funding than the state average. Imagine what we could do with our fair share.
As the school board’s Legislative Representative, I will continue to fight to address longstanding inequities in state funding and local levy authorization. I’ll champion education reforms that enable us to attract and retain the highest quality teachers and principals, including data tracking systems that provide the accountability needed to ensure our limited resources are placed where they do the most good for kids.
Occupation: Software Design Consultant, Jetstream Software (former Microsoft Lead Program Manager)
Education: BS in Electrical Engineering from Cornell University, U.S. Navy Nuclear Power School, Microsoft Certified Professional
5/20/2009
I get a lot of questions about education funding inequities, and that's really to be expected because of the complexity of the current funding formulas. Many community members know that the Issaquah School District gets considerably less funding than most districts, but there's more to this story.
First of all, let me state clearly that I'm proud that Issaquah continues to achieve some of the highest standardized test scores in the state while ranked 271st in per-pupil revenue out of 295 districts statewide in 2008-09. We have the lowest administrative overhead in King County, saving $4M/year compared to the average. We do more with less, and I wish that more government institutions would follow our lead.
The objection I have is that the current funding inequities have no rational basis and create an uneven playing field for school districts.
Our current funding formulas and levy lids were essentially hacked together in 1977 and included grandfather clauses to passify large influential districts that were paying higher teacher salaries and collecting larger local levies. The intent, of course, was to eventually equalize the rates by raising everyone up to these levels, but that never came to pass.
So what does this mean to Issaquah?
Currently, we would receive an extra $11.5M/year with the average state per-pupil funding. In addition, we lose an additional $7.3M/year vs. Bellevue and $10.6M/year vs. Mercer Island because of inequities in our levy authorization.
Ultimately, that means that neighboring districts can provide students more class offerings and offer teachers and principals more competitive pay.
For example, by recovering just $3.0 - $4.7M of these funds, we could offer an additional class period in our high schools enabling us to further raise graduation standards and offer electives that give our kids the edge they need to get the best jobs.
So is there hope for change?
ESHB 2261 established K-12 Funding Formula and Local Funding technical working groups to create a new set of funding formulas based on a model schools approach rather than political compromises from the 70s. Our expectation is that the new model will much more closely reflect the real costs of education, including adjustments for regional cost of living.
Unfortunately, the Local Funding working group doesn't meet until July 1, 2010, and we expect quite a bit of resistance to change from those districts benefitting from the current inequities, which are basically districts with grandfathered levy lids and smaller districts who receive levy equalization (LEA) funds and fear local funding disparity from perceived "property rich" districts.
What will drive change?
Our district lost an additional $7.3M this year to budget cuts and the expectation is that additional cuts will be forthcoming next year and the following state biennium budget when we will no longer have benefit of state fiscal stabilization funds from the federal government. Many districts like ours will become insolvent, especially if they hold back on budget cuts, retain too many employees, or agree to concessions they can't afford in collective bargaining.
Currently, there are two high-profile legal cases drawing attention to state funding inequities, which makes me confident that the legislature will soon enact measures to address these issues next session when they have recommendations from the K-12 Funding Formula Technical Working Group and Quality Education Council. There are currently no legal cases highlighting the inequities in levy authorization, however, so I'm not as optimistic about seeing changes to the levy lids. If we want change here, we're going to have to drive it ourselves by participating in the K-12 Supplemental Funding Technical Working Group and raising awareness with the QEC, our legislators, and the general public. |
|
|
|