|
On Wednesday evening, the House Education Appropriations
Committee held a work session to review the education (early
learning, K-12 and higher education) portions of Gov.
Gregoire’s 2010 Supplemental Operating Budget. Staff from
the Office of Financial Management (the governor’s budget
office) briefed Committee members on both Gregoire’s
original budget request released in December and her Book II
budget request unveiled earlier this week. There was no “new
news” discussed in last night’s hearing; however, as
occurred in the House Ways & Means Committee hearing, there
were several questions regarding the “linkage” of the
restoration of Local Effort Assistance with an increase in
school districts’ local levy lids. The response from the
governor’s staff made it clear the two issues will be
coupled together (at least initially — legislators will
ultimately determine how to handle the issues). It also
became clear from comments from legislators that the
battle-lines have already begun to be drawn on the issue. As
last year’s 11th hour fight over HB 1776 (regarding levy
lids, levy bases, levy equalization and levy rollbacks)
showed, a fight over school levy issues can be nasty. It
appears a fight over these issues this year will be no
easier.
Last night’s budget briefing was followed by a public
hearing on the governor’s budget in the House Education
Appropriations Committee this morning. It was no
surprise that most testifying expressed appreciation for
the proposed restoration of several education items on
the governor’s original cut list; however, over and over
the message was relayed that school districts just do
not have any “extra” money and any and all reductions
will have an impact on staff and students alike. It was
mentioned multiple times that the financial solvency of
many school districts is very much in jeopardy. We
expected this session — and specifically the budget
discussions — to be very tough, and all early evidence
show that the fight may be even more difficult than even
first imagined. This week’s discussions are just a
reminder of how important it will be for school
directors and other members of the education community
to continue to build relationships with legislators and
clearly and plainly explain to them what the 2010
Supplemental Operating Budget could mean to the state’s
K-12 education system.
This morning, the Senate Early Learning &K-12
Education Committee held a work session to review the
background of the state’s voluntary accountability
system. This was a preview to a work session scheduled
next week, wherein the State Board will discuss its
recently adopted
system performance accountability plan, which
includes required accountability actions.
Finally, the House Capital Budget Committee held a
work session to review K-12 energy efficiency and safety
and health infrastructure improvements. The Committee
also took executive action on
HB 2561 (bonds for public facility energy-saving
retrofits), passing it onto the full House for its
consideration. Prior to adoption, a series of ten
amendments were introduced by minority Republicans. Each
amendment was defeated, mostly along party lines, with
majority Democrats opposing and minority Republicans
supporting. Amendments included: a limiting of the grant
program to public schools and higher education; a
requirement that the State Auditor audit use of the
grants to ensure actual monetary savings — coupled with
a requirement that the facility owner be reimbursed if
the actual savings is less than projected; and a
requirement that mandated energy audits be fully funded
by the state. It became even more clear during debate on
the amendments that HB 2561’s main overriding focus is
about jobs and job creation; and financial assistance to
school facilities and other public buildings is only a
secondary motivation. This is not to imply that HB 2561
is a bad bill; however, it is often important to be
aware of why certain legislation is introduced and why
some bills may or may not move through the process.
|
