Education Updates courtesy of
Joan Platz,
League of
Women Voters
of Ohio

Education Update for October 1st, 2005

Education Update for September 26th, 2005

Education Update for September 19th, 2005

Education Update for September 12th, 2005

Education Update for September 5th, 2005

Education Update for August 29th, 2005

SPECIAL REPORT on HB 66: Education Update for July 5th, 2005

Education Update for June 27th, 2005

Education Update for June 20th, 2005

Education Update for June 13th, 2005

Education Update for June 6th, 2005

Education Update for May 30th, 2005

Education Update for May 23rd, 2005

Education Update for May 16th, 2005

Education Update for May 9, 2005

Education Update for May 2, 2005

Education Update for April 25, 2005

Education Update for April 18, 2005

Education Update for April 11, 2005

Education Update for April 4, 2005

Education Update for March 28, 2005

Education Update for March 21, 2005

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To: LWVO
From: Joan Platz
Education Update for April 25, 2005

1) 126th General Assembly:
The Ohio House and Senate will hold hearings and committee meetings this week. The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions, the Senate Ways and Means Committee, and the Senate Education Committee will continue to hear testimony from state departments, agencies, and boards on Am.Sub. HB 66 (Calvert), the proposed state budget for FY06-07. Please see "This Week at the Statehouse" for information about specific hearings.

*The House Education Committee chaired by Representative Setzer reported out favorably on April 19, 2005 HB121 (Reinhard) - school calamity days. This bill is on the Ohio House schedule for a vote this week.

*On Wednesday, April 20, 2005 researchers from the Legislative Office of Education Oversight (LOEO), Nancy Zajano Executive Director, presented two reports to members of the Legislative Committee on Legislative Oversight, chaired by Representative Setzer.

The first report, "Ohio's Autism Scholarship Program" prepared by Cynthia DeJacimo, focused on the implementation of this new program, which provides a voucher of up to $15,000 for parents of children with autism, to pay for services for their child. It is estimated that 5,400 students identified with autism live in Ohio. 270 applicants were approved to participate in the program last year, and 60 percent of participants were enrolled in preschool and grades K-3.

The report recommended that the program continue as a pilot and not be expanded. It was also recommended that a thorough evaluation of program be completed later. Questions concerning compliance with federal law were raised by committee members, because some of the settings where the vouchers are used provide services that do not comply with "least restrictive environment" provision of the federal Individual with Disabilities Education Act. It was noted, however, that since some of the programs that receive the vouchers are private, they do not have to follow the federal law, even though they receive public funds.

The second LOEO report presented, "Academic Intervention Services" prepared by Dr. Beckett Broh, was based on an analysis of intervention programs through case studies conducted in ten school districts. The analysis found that the Ohio Department of Education does not monitor district compliance with laws to provide intervention services. The analysis also found it difficult to determine the impact of intervention services, because many services are intertwined with classroom instruction. The analysis noted, however, that the services provided are influenced by federal and state accountability systems and funding, so that intervention for reading and math are provided more often than for science and social studies. The LOEO report recommended that the ODE better coordinate the intervention services provided.

Director Nancy Zajano also reported that the LOEO has completed four studies in 2004 and two in 2005. Studies of electronic community schools and "highly qualified" teachers will be presented later this year. Other reports are due in 2006. The LOEO has completed over 70 reports since it was established.

2) Ohio Senate holds hearings on the proposed FY06-07 Budget:
Testimony on Am. Sub. HB66 (Calvert), the proposed FY06-07 state budget, started on April 12, 2005 before the Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee chaired by Senator Carey. Presenting an overview of the Executive Budget and changes made by the Ohio House to HB66 were Tom Johnson, Director of the Office of Budget and Management, Bruce Johnson, Lieutenant Governor and Director of the Ohio Department of Development, Bill Wilkins, Director of the Ohio Department of Taxation, and representatives of the Legislative Service Commission.

According to written testimony presented by Tom Johnson, HB66 (Calvert) as introduced "....updates our tax structure to reflect our current economy thereby making Ohio a more attractive place for companies to invest. It puts the state on solid financial ground by balancing spending with on-going revenues. It conservatively provides for essential state services while investing in priorities that leverage progress for our future." The Ohio House retained the major provisions of HB66, including Governor Taft's tax reform plan. However, Director Johnson requested that the Senate make the following changes in HB66:

*Reconsider the House-added tax exemptions.

*Use the more conservative budget estimates prepared by the Office of Budget and Management for state revenue. These estimates are $19.697 billion in FY06 and $19.995 billion in FY07, compared to those of the Legislative Service Commission of $19.757 billion in FY06 and $20.121 billion in FY07.

*Implement the building blocks funding model for primary and secondary education in FY06.

*Provide adequate funding for Student Assessments to allow for continued development of both achievement and diagnostic tests.

*Reconsider the rate and scope of the expanded voucher program added by the House.

*Consider the impact on the school funding formula of higher ADM and the new data on property valuation, which shows a decrease in valuation. This will mean more state funding may be needed through the formula.

*Reconsider the House plan to collapse several of the Board of Regents appropriation line items into one line item for FY 2007.

*Reconsider the Medicaid case load estimates included by the House.

*Reconsider nursing home funding levels and remove the reimbursement rate formula from statute.

*Reconsider the reduction in the number served by the assisted living waiver.

*Review the cost to provide managed care for a subset of the Aged, Blind and Disabled (ABD) population.

*Reconsider the consolidation of the 20 out of 27 regulatory boards.

*Provide the state park system with a dedicated, sustainable funding stream.

*Exercise caution when using onetime revenue, such as tobacco funds for state programs.

3) Coming this Fall: Constitutional Amendments!!:
If citizen groups have their way, voters in Ohio will have several opportunities to change... or not change.... the Ohio Constitution on November 8, 2005. So far backers of Educate Ohio and Citizens for Tax Repeal have received the go-ahead from Attorney General Jim Petro to gather 322,899 signatures by August 10, 2005 in order to place two constitutional amendments on the November 2005 ballot.

The Educate Ohio amendment would establish a 19 member Ohio Educational Opportunities Commission, appointed by the governor, to determine every two years the educational opportunities of a high quality education system, and the actual cost of the educational components. The General Assembly would fund each school district equal to 100 percent of the cost of the educational opportunities minus the proceeds from 15 mills of taxes on real property. The amendment also holds districts harmless for any loss in funding due to the approval of this amendment.

The tax reform initiative is backed by Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell and several members of the Ohio General Assembly. The amendment would limit state spending beyond the rate of inflation, and make it harder for the General Assembly to raise taxes.

Another group that supports gambling is waiting for the Attorney General to approve petition language so that they can start collecting signatures.

Last week a new coalition called Reform Ohio Now announced that it is working to place election reform language on the November 2005 ballot. The reforms would address campaign finance, redistricting, and oversight of elections in Ohio. The coalition is led by Paul Tipps, Andy Douglas, and Herb Asher.

Voters may also be asked to approve a statewide initiative that would allow the sale of bonds to support local government infrastructure improvements and Governor Taft's ThirdFrontier Initiative.

4) Legislation to Cap Charter Schools Introduced:
Two bills that would cap the number of charter schools in Ohio at 225 were introduced last week in the Ohio House and Senate. SB 129 (Schuring) and HB 213 (Oelslager) would renew the current 225 cap on the creation of charter schools sponsored by entities other than school districts. This cap expires on June 30, 2005. HB 213 is cosponsored by Representatives Jim Hughes, Merle Grace Kearns, Derrick Seaver, Jennifer Garrison, Timothy Cassell, Lance Mason, Kathleen Chandler, Michael Skindell, Annie Key, Ken Carano, William Healy, William Hartnett, Jeanine Perry, and Peter Ujvagi. SB129 is cosponsored by Senators Randy Gardner, Robert Spada, Steve Austria, C.J. Prentiss, Larry Mumper, Jeff Armbruster, Teresa Fedor, Mark Mallory, Dan Brady, Marc Dann, Eric Fingerhut, Robert Hagan, Ray Miller, Tom Roberts, Charles Wilson and Kimberly Zurz.

5) Federal Update:
The U.S. House and Senate still have not agreed on a FY06 budget document, although both chambers approved their versions of the budget several weeks ago. The budget serves as a framework for future appropriations, and hearings on appropriation resolutions have already begun in House and Senate committees.

*The National Education Association, along with nine school districts in Michigan, Texas, and Vermont filed suit on April 20, 2005 against the U.S. Department of Education. The suit alleges that the U.S. DOE has forced districts to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act in violation of NCLB Sec. 9527 (a), "Unfunded Mandates Provision". This section states that "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize an officer or employee of the Federal government to . . . mandate a state or any subdivision thereof to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under this Act."

The plaintiffs allege that the federal testing requirements for all students, including the alternate assessment for some students in special education classes and assessment of students who do not speak English proficiently, cost more than the federal support provided. The U.S. Department of Education and the Bush administration have stated that sufficient funds have been allocated to support the federal requirements, and furthermore, federal funding for education has increased by millions of dollars.

For more information on the lawsuit go to http://www.nea.org/lawsuit

6) Series on Building Early Childhood Systems Available:
The UCLA National Center for Infant and Early Childhood Health Policy has released a series of reports entitled "Building State Early Childhood Comprehensive Systems". The reports and policy briefs provide information for policy makers and advocates about components of a comprehensive system for young children. The reports include the following topics: Building Bridges, Environmental Scan, Early Childhood System Building Tool, Results Accountability for a State Early Childhood Comprehensive System, Strategic Financing: Making the Most of the State Early Childhood Comprehensive Systems Initiative, A Strategic Planning Guide for State-Level Early Childhood Systems-Building Initiatives, Framing Early Childhood Development: Strategic Communications and Public Preferences, Improving Systems of Health and Developmental Services in Early Childhood, Building Community Systems for Young Children: Early Care and Education, Addressing Social-Emotional Development and Infant Mental Health In Early Childhood Systems, Promoting Positive Parenting Practices Through Parenting Education, Family Support: Fostering Leadership and Partnership to Improve Access and Quality. The report is available at http://www.healthychild.ucla.edu/

7) Report about Afterschool Programs Available:
The National League of Cities, Institute for Youth, Education and Family has issued a report entitled, "The Afterschool Hours: A New Focus for America's Cities" by Mark Ouellette, Audrey M. Hutchinson, and Nina Frant, and funded by the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. (A Report on the Municipal Leadership for Expanded Learning Opportunities Project)

The report includes the experiences of eight cities and their efforts to plan, implement, and evaluate afterschool programs for children and young adults. The eight cities participating in this project are Charlotte, North Carolina; Fort Worth, Texas; Fresno, California; Grand Rapids, Michigan; Indianapolis, Indiana; Lincoln, Nebraska; Spokane, Washington; and Washington, D.C. The report notes that children and young adults can be engaged in valuable reinforcement, supplemental, and enrichment learning activities after school, and communities have a significant role to play in providing these after-school opportunities. The following lessons learned about afterschool programs are explained in the conclusion of the report:

-Municipal leaders have an array of opportunities to advance the afterschool agenda.

-Engaging residents and key stakeholders takes time, as well as a commitment to developing a community-wide vision and goals.

-Municipal officials are well-positioned to build trust and support among schools and afterschool providers.

-Developing standards has to be a collaborative enterprise involving providers and the broader community.

-Ensuring coverage in underserved communities requires both new investments and effective outreach to parents.

-City leadership is essential to ensure funding and develop plans for long-term sustainability.

-Good data is invaluable in making the case for community support.

The report is dedicated to the memory of G. Hannah Dillard, education advisor to Mayor Michael Coleman of Columbus, and a driving force for the Capital Kids afterschool program and other education initiatives in Columbus. Ms. Dillard passed away unexpectedly in January 2005, and is greatly missed. The report is available at http://www.nlc.org/content/Files/IYEF-Lessons%20Learned%20AfterschooI.pdf

8) Charter School Advocates Address Subcommittee:
Several proponents of charter schools presented information on the charter school movement in Ohio to members of the Ohio House Alternative Education Subcommittee chaired by Representative Peterson on April 21, 2005. According to Representative Peterson the purpose of the committee is to review alternative education systems and programs, including charter schools and voucher programs, and make recommendations to the Ohio General Assembly. At its first subcommittee meeting, representatives from the Ohio Department of Education presented an overview of charter schools, the Cleveland Scholarship Program, and intervention services. According to testimony by the Ohio Department of Education, there are 249 charter schools in Ohio, serving over 62,000 students.

During this week's meeting, the Subcommittee heard testimony about charter schools in Ohio. The following proponents of charter schools made presentations on April 21, 2005:

*Krista Allison from the Ohio Charter School Association, urged lawmakers to continue support for current charter schools, allow the number of new charter schools in Ohio to increase, continue to provide parity aid and other financial support to charter schools, and hold all schools accountable for student success.

*Sally Perz, former state representative and currently representing for-profit charter school management companies, provided a history of her experiences as a lawmaker in the Ohio General Assembly and as an early advocate for charter schools. She reported that in the past school districts operated as if they "owned" the students and there was no competition. Charter school opponents are "well organized and well-funded", and she announced that "this is a war" between charter and public schools.

Ms. Perz recommended that charter schools be allowed to open in any school district; representatives of charter schools be included on education-related task forces, boards, and commissions; charter schools receive funding directly from the state; public schools be required to release student records in a timely manner; and the General Assembly should create a charter school board to oversee charter schools in Ohio.

*Chester E. Finn Jr., president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and Terry Ryan also from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute spoke about the charter movement nationally and the schools in the Dayton area where the Fordham Foundation has been working. Mr. Finn stated that charter schools represent some of the best and worst schools that he has seen. Forty states now allow charter schools to operate, and there are approximately 3000 charter schools in the U.S. serving 750,000 students. The sponsor, principal, and business manager have significant responsibilities to ensure the quality and success of the school. Successful schools have a coherent education strategy, leadership, and business acumen.

Mr. Finn recommended several ways to improve Ohio's charter school system, including provide adequate funding; provide financial incentives for success; require an entry cost for new school sponsors; require sponsors to demonstrate success, such as requiring schools to meet "continuous improvement status"; limit individual sponsors to 50 schools; make charter school sponsorship transparent; make charter school sponsorship more appealing to established organizations; allow state facilities funding under certain conditions; and improve sponsorships.

*Jennifer Vranek representing the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, reported that the Gates Foundation has invested millions in education projects in Ohio, including the Ohio High School Transformation Initiative and the Early College High School Network. The Foundation is also a member of the Ohio Charter School Sponsor Institute, and believes that, "there is a school for every kid".

According to her presentation, the Gates Foundation believes that comprehensive high schools lack rigor, relevance, and relationships and need to be changed. The Foundation is interested in charter schools, because they are autonomous and innovative, and provide more options to improve education. An environment for education should be developed to support authorizers and operators, ensure accountability, provide adequate funding, address facility needs, and promote networks to share strategies and practices.

Ms. Vranek made the following recommendations: provide charter schools with at least 90 percent of both state and local funding; provide more funding for charter high schools; and require qualified sponsors, such as Charter Management Organizations (CMOs). State policies need to be developed to hold charter schools accountable, because the market place is not enough.

*Clint Satow, the Ohio Charter School Association reported on the performance of charter schools and characterized criticism of charter school performance as a "vicious attack". Charter school performance is more complicated than test score results, and recent comparisons with traditional public schools have not been fair. He referenced reports about the performance of charter schools nationally, and stated that over time more sophisticated analysis will be developed to document student growth and value added.

*Samuel Staley representing the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions provided a policy paper explaining how charter schools are funded in Ohio, and spoke about the importance of competition to improve education. The Buckeye Institute has also surveyed parents who send their children to charter schools, and has found that they are satisfied. Policy makers should support even more educational options that are "child-centered", including vouchers, reducing school size, and decentralizing large school districts.

9) This Week at the Statehouse:
The following are some of the committee meetings that will be held this week in Columbus. Please check with the chairman of the committee, as times and locations of committee meetings often change.

TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2005
The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee chaired by Senator Carey (466-8156) will meet on April 26, 2005 at 9:30 AM in the Senate Finance Hearing Room to hear testimony on Am. Sub. HB 66 (Calvert), the FY06-07 biennial budget from the Ohio Department of Education. Testimony by Chancellor Roderick Chu on the Board of Regents Budget will be presented at 2:00 PM or after session.

The Senate Ways & Means & Economic Development Committee chaired by Senator Amstutz (466-7505) will meet in the South Hearing Room at 3:30 PM to hear testimony on SB 1 (Amstutz), which includes tax reform provisions recommended by Governor Taft, and included in the FY06-07 budget, Am. Sub. HB 66 (Calvert).

The House Education Committee chaired by Representative Setzer (644-8051) will at 3:30 PM in room 018. The committee will hear testimony on the following bills: SB 6 (Padgett) - continued learning partnership; SB 71 (Wilson) - calamity days; HB 107 (Setzer) - alignment of teacher education standards; and HB 115 (Setzer) - educational regional services system.

The Senate Education Committee chaired by Senator Padgett, (466-8076) will meet at 5:00 PM in the North Hearing Room. The committee will hear public testimony on the higher education budget included in Am. Sub. HB66 (Calvert).

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2005
The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee chaired by Senator Carey (466-8156), will meet at 9:30 AM in the Finance Hearing Room. The Committee will hear testimony on HB66 regarding the Cultural Facilities Commission, the Ohio Arts Council, the Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board, the Legislative Service Commission, and the Commission on African American Males.

The Senate Education Committee chaired by Senator Padgett, (466-8076) will meet at 5:00 PM in the North Hearing Room. The committee will hear public testimony on the higher education budget included in Am. Sub. HB66 (Calvert).

THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 2005
The House Education, Alternative Education Subcommittee chaired by Representative Peterson (644-6711) will meet at 11:00 AM in room 017. The Committee will hear presentations from the Ohio Association of School Business Officials, Ohio School Board Association, Buckeye Association of School Administrators, and Ohio Association of EMIS Professionals.

The Senate Education Committee chaired by Senator Padgett (466-8076) will meet at 5:00 PM in the North Hearing Room. The committee will hear public testimony on the higher education budget included in Am. Sub. HB66 (Calvert).

10) Bills Introduced the Week of April 18, 2005:
SB 129 (Schuring) Extends the statewide cap on the number of community schools sponsored by entities other than the school districts in which they would be located, creates the Joint Study Committee on Ohio's Community Schools, and makes changes to the Community Schools Law.

HB 213 (Oelslager) Extends the statewide cap on the number of community schools sponsored by entities other than the school districts in which they would be located, creates the Joint Study Committee on Ohio's Community Schools, and makes changes to the Community Schools Law.

HB 210 (Patton. T.) Freezes the taxes on primary residences owned and occupied by persons 65 years of age or older.

HB 203 (Raga) Requires the Director of Health to establish the School Health and Safety Network to coordinate and collect data from school inspections, and to include Network inspection rules within the practice of environmental health for registered sanitarians.

HB 205 (Allen) Freezes the taxes on primary residences owned and occupied by persons 65 years of age or older.

Back to TOP

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To: LWVO
From: Joan Platz
Education Update for April 18, 2005

1) 126th General Assembly:
The Ohio House approved on April 12, 2005 by a vote of 54 -45 Am. Sub. HB 66 (Calvert), the $51.328 billion state operating budget for FY06-07. HB 66 now moves to the Ohio Senate for consideration. The deadline for adopting the state's FY06-07 budget is June 30, 2005.

Most of the changes in Ohio's tax system, which were recommended by Governor Taft and included in HB1 (Kilbane), were amended into HB66. These changes include establishing a Commercial Activity Tax (CAT) at a rate of .26 percent on gross receipts over $1 million; phasing-out over five years the tax on inventory and tangible personal property, including machinery, equipment, furniture, and fixtures; phasing-in cuts to the personal income tax rates; and retaining a half-cent increase in the state's sales tax. The House version of HB66 also includes exemptions to the CAT tax.

During debate on the floor of the House, proponents urged passage of HB66 to boost Ohio's economy and control government spending. It was also noted by lawmakers that HB66 would slow the growth in the Medicaid program, and includes large reductions in the state's income tax.

Opponents of HB 66 offered over 30 amendments to address tax reform, medicaid reductions, and education, but these amendments were tabled.

In response to the passage of HB 66, Senate Minority Leader C.J. Prentiss released a statement to urge members of the Ohio Senate to consider in their debate on HB 66 its effect on working families and the poor. According to Senator Prentiss, the bill fails to address the core problems facing Ohioans, including relief for working families and individuals. The 21 percent cut in taxes will help top wage earners in Ohio, while the reductions in Medicaid and other programs will hurt the poor.

"Additionally, their budget fails to invest in schools and higher education and restore local government funding. In short, it shifts the tax burden to local communities. If this budget passes as is local communities and school districts will face more levies and tax increases."

Senate Democrats will try to amend the bill to create more jobs, provide better health care, support education, and support local government.

Visit the web site of the Ohio Department of Education for more information about the education components of HB66.

Am. Sub. HB66 is available at http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText126/126_HB_66_PH_Y.pdf

2) Education Organizations Speak Out:
The following is a statement released on April 17, 2005 by several education organizations in Ohio:

WHERE WE STAND - A Joint Position Statement from:

Buckeye Association of School Administrators
Ohio Association of Elementary School Administrators
Ohio Association of Public School Employees
Ohio Association of School Business Officials
Ohio Association of Secondary School Administrators
Ohio Congress of Parents and Teachers (PTA)
Ohio Education Association
Ohio Federation of Teachers
Ohio School Boards Association

Our organizations are deeply concerned about the state of public school funding in Ohio, and we are working hard to achieve improvements in this critical area. We believe a well-funded high quality public education is the best way to achieve social and economic development in our state.

Our statewide associations are frequently asked by members, legislators and the media where we stand on some of the important school funding questions. These are not always easy questions to answer since issues move in and out of the spotlight and there are constant suggestions for changes and variations in the issues under consideration.

Nevertheless, this paper will make clear our position as of this writing on two major issues in the school funding arena: The Report of the Governor's Blue Ribbon Task Force on Financing Student Success and the proposed Educate Ohio constitutional amendment, sometimes known as the Flannery amendment because of its chief proponent.

The Current Budget Debate and Tax Reform
All of our organizations are focused on the education components of the current budget and tax reform proposals. Some of us have testified officially in the House Finance Committee and in the House and Senate Ways and Means Committees. We are talking to legislators and seeking amendments that will be helpful to school districts. These efforts seeking short-term improvements will continue.

TEL and TABOR
Our organizations are preparing to actively oppose any effort in Ohio to create a Tax Expenditure Limitation (TEL) or a Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Such artificial limits on government revenue and spending would be disastrous for Ohio and for the delivery of public services in Ohio, including public education. Decisions about taxation and spending should be made by those elected to make those decisions. Voters have the ability to hold those decision makers accountable for their decisions.

Blue Ribbon Task Force Recommendations
The Blue Ribbon Task Force, composed of business, legislative and education leaders, developed a set of recommendations that would be an improvement in school funding. Those recommendations covered mechanisms to increase the base cost component of the funding formula and direct funding towards students with specific needs. The recommendations also contained a proposed constitutional amendment to fix phantom revenue.

We believe the Blue Ribbon recommendations, if fully implemented as a complete package, would constitute a significant improvement in education funding in Ohio. However, no proposal to implement the complete package is currently under consideration. Some elements of the Blue Ribbon recommendations are being considered in the current budget debate, but they are not workable because they would not be completely implemented and because they do not include the entire Blue Ribbon package.

The Blue Ribbon Task Force recommended that the state undertake a study of the feasibility of a statewide health care insurance pool for all public school employees. We are particularly concerned about the proposed creation of a statewide health care insurance pool without the benefit of an independent actuarial study regarding the financial viability of such a plan based on the actual usage and experience of existing education employees. It is vitally important to understand what the impact on individual school districts would be before such a plan is created. Basing savings projections on gross provider estimates runs the risk of creating an unsustainable program that fails to provide quality health care or reduce costs.

We plan to continue work and study on the Blue Ribbon recommendations and to use them as the foundation for a complete school funding solution. Starting from the Blue Ribbon recommendations, we will build a school funding plan that determines the cost of a high quality education, specifies how that cost will be paid, and eliminates reappraisal phantom revenue. We will gather broad support in the education community for this plan and take it to the General Assembly for consideration later this year. If the General Assembly does not act, the plan can be taken to the voters in 2006.

We recognize that this is an enormous undertaking and will be difficult to accomplish. If the education community unites strongly behind a plan, and if we are able to educate the public on the problem and the solution, success is attainable. The future of our students and our state depends upon it.

The Educate Ohio (Flannery) Amendment
This proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution is described by proponents as an overall solution to school funding in Ohio. It would create a commission, appointed by the Governor with a majority membership of educators, to identify the components of a high quality education. These components would be costed out by the state board of education, and fully funding the resulting cost of a high quality education would be a constitutional obligation of the General Assembly.

All local property taxes for operations would be reduced to 15 mills and the loss in revenue to school districts would be made up by the state. In addition, the state would fully fund the cost of the high quality education less a 15-mill charge off.

Our organizations met with Mr. Flannery, the former state legislator who is the chief proponent of the amendment. We discussed the amendment thoroughly and raised questions and concerns. Mr. Flannery informed us that he was going ahead with the amendment whether the education organizations supported it or not.

After careful consideration, our organizations decided not to support the amendment. Our reasons for this decision include:

1. 2005 is not a good time to put the amendment on the ballot. There is insufficient time to plan and implement the major campaign that would be necessary. We need to devote our resources to the current budget and tax reform debate, which will continue until July 1. We also need to actively oppose any Tax Expenditure Limitation (TEL) or Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) that might be on the November 2005 ballot.

2. It is too late for a credible effort in 2005. Gathering the hundreds of thousands of petition signatures and raising the millions of dollars needed for a campaign can't be done in the time available.

3. Implementation of this amendment would be extremely expensive. If it were done in the current year, it would cost the state $2.3 billion just for the hold harmless on reducing millage to 15 mills. A significant portion of this money would go to higher wealth districts. The cost to the state of paying for a high quality education would be in addition to that amount.

4. This huge cost to the state would provoke intense opposition from those who fear their state taxes would go up to pay for it, and from other state agencies and services who fear their funding would be cut to pay for education.

5. The property tax is a very reliable source of revenue for education, and we do not want to drastically reduce that local revenue as proposed by the amendment.

6. Hold harmless mechanisms are notoriously difficult to devise, implement and maintain. The amendment places this mechanism totally under the control of the General Assembly and that may be a precarious position upon which to base a significant part of school funding.

7. The process of identifying and costing out the components of a high quality education will continue to be a politically controlled process. We have no confidence that the process will produce a sound, research-based definition of a high quality education.

8. Proponents of this amendment may argue that it meets the requirements contained in the DeRolph decision. That may be true. Nevertheless, the amendment is still costly, impractical, and subject to manipulation by the political process and the General Assembly.

9. We believe the ideas raised by Mr. Flannery should be carefully considered along with those raised by the Blue Ribbon Task Force and others. We invite him to work with us in doing that instead of advocating this proposal. A comprehensive school funding solution should be developed and given to the General Assembly for consideration and action. If that fails, that is the proper time to take a solution to the voters of Ohio.

3) This Week at the Statehouse:
The Ohio House and Senate will hold sessions and committee meetings this week. The Senate Finance and Financial Institutions Committee, chaired by Senator Carey, will hear testimony from state agencies and departments on Am. Sub. HB 66 (Calvert), the state's FY06-07 operating budget. Testimony on the education related issues in the budget will be held in the Senate Education Committee, chaired by Senator Padgett. Those hearings will begin April 26, 2005. The following are just some of the committees meeting that will be held this week at the Statehouse:

The House Education Committee chaired by Representative Setzer (644-8051) will meet on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 3:30 PM in room 018. The Committee will hear testimony on the following bills:

SB 6 (Padgett) Partnership for Continued Learning

SB 71 (Wilson) Calamity Days

HB 105 (Setzer) Physical Education Standards

HB 107 (Setzer) Teacher Education Standards

HB 115 (Setzer) Regional Educational Service System

HB 121 (Reinhard) Calamity Days

HB 167 (Boccieri) Testing for dyslexia and related disorders, and to provide intervention services to students identified as having dyslexia or a related disorder.

The Legislative Committee on Education Oversight chaired by Representative Setzer (644-8051) will meet on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 at 8:30 AM in the McKinley Room (formerly 121). The Committee will hear presentations on two recent LOEO reports, and hear a report from the Director.

The House Education: Alternative Education Subcommittee, chaired by Representative Peterson (644-6711), will meet on Thursday, April 21, 2005 at 11:00 AM in room 017. The Charter School Association, Fordham Foundation, and the Gates Foundation will make presentations.

4) Highlights from the State Board of Education Meeting:
The State Board of Education, Sue Westendorf President, met on April 11-12, 2005 at the Ohio School for the Deaf, 500 Morse Road in Columbus, OH.

On April 11, 2005 Mitch Chester, Assistant Superintendent for Policy and Accountability, Stan Heffner, Associate Superintendent, Center for Curriculum and Assessment, Judy Feil, Director of the Office of Assessment, and Don Peasley, Assistant Director, Office of Assessment led the Board in a discussion about assessment development, setting scores on achievement tests and the OGT, Ohio's accountability system, and setting scores for alternate assessment. The presentations included a review of the difference between the new standards-based assessments in grades 3-8 and the former proficiency tests; the purpose for assessments in a standards-based system; the need to develop an assessment system and state accountability system that is predictable across grade levels (consistent scaling); and issues regarding setting the scale scores for the achievement tests and the Ohio Graduation Test.

Mitch Chester reminded members that the statutory purposes of the achievement tests include: measures grade level achievement of student learning of valuable content; identifies the need for intervention; informs report card ratings; informs promotion decisions; and informs the value added progress dimension. The statutory purposes of the Ohio Graduation Tests include: measures high school levels of student learning of valuable content; identifies the need for intervention; informs report card ratings, and is used to determine graduation status. Because the OGT is given in the 10th grade, it is a "floor" and not a "ceiling" for student achievement. Performing well on the OGT does not assure that students are ready for post-secondary education or the workplace, and so students must be encouraged to take higher level courses in high school in the 11th and 12th grades.

Stan Heffner discussed further the efforts of the Ohio Department of Education to help teachers, principals, and parents use assessment data to inform instruction and improve student achievement. The ODE has been working on a pilot project with testing companies to develop a new prototype score report for educators and parents. This new report will provide teachers and principals with more information about individual student and classroom performance on indicators and benchmarks, will provide parents and families better feedback about student achievement. In July 2005 a web site will also be available through the ODE to provide parents learning strategies and links to other sites to help students learn.

Judy Feil and Don Peasley then led the Board in a discussion and overview of the standards setting process for the alternate assessment. Currently students participate in the state's accountability system by either taking the general assessment; taking assessments with accommodations; or taking the alternate assessments. The Board is scheduled to adopt at its May 2005 Board meeting an alternate standard of achievement for certain students identified through their Individualized Education Plan. These students participate in the state's accountability system in compliance with the federal No Child Left Behind Act through this alternative assessment of their achievement. The process used in Ohio to develop the alternate assessment is the Collection of Evidence Method. This is a standardized process that includes samples of their work, teacher observations, interviews, or videotape. Currently the federal No Child Left Behind Act allows 1 percent of students to be assessed using an alternate assessment, although Ohio was granted a waiver and was allowed 1.2 percent of students to use the alternate assessment last year. The U.S. Department of Education recently announced a new policy on the use of alternate assessments, and is expected to issue new guidelines this summer.

The Achievement Committee, co-chaired by Mike Cochran and Jim Craig, reviewed a number of resolutions for Board consideration, including those regarding special education; standard scores for alternate assessments; OGT standards setting; exemplar lessons for foreign language, fine arts, and technology; and discussed amendments to Rule 3301-13-07, honors diploma, Rules 3301-3-01 through 3301-3-07, data acquisition sites, Rules 3301-50-01 and 3301-101-01, and amending Rule 3301-15-02, school district accountability.

July Feil led the Board in a detailed discussion of the standard setting process that will be used this month to determine the cut scores for limited, basic, proficient, accelerated, and advanced levels of student achievement on the Ohio Graduation Tests. The Board is expected to adopt the scores in June 2005. The two processes that will be used by the OGT Standards Setting Panel are the Bookmark Method and the Body of Evidence Method, which will be used to set OGT standards for writing. The proficient score is very important in Ohio, because students must be proficient or above in order to receive a diploma. Proficient means just barely demonstrating knowledge and skills in a content area, and so the cut score is not comparable to a "normed" score.

Greg Paulmann, Associate Director, Office of Curriculum and Instruction, presented information to the Achievement Committee on the lessons included in Set A - Exemplar Lessons for Technology, Fine Arts, and Foreign Languages. The Board will consider for adoption in May these discrete and interdisciplinary lessons. Sets B & C, which are currently being developed, will be presented later. The lessons will also be included on the Instructional Management System.

Set A for Fine Arts includes 38 fine arts lessons (dance, drama/theatre, music and visual arts), written by a 35 member writing team. 68 of 184 benchmarks (37 percent) are covered in Set A; 9 lessons are interdisciplinary - science, social studies, mathematics, and English Language arts.

Set A for Foreign Languages includes 34 lessons written by a 34 member writing team. 81 of 85 benchmarks (95 percent) are covered in Set A; 11 lessons are interdisciplinary - science, social studies, technology, fine arts, and English Language arts.

Set A for Technology includes 28 lessons written by a 24 member writing team. 46 of 97 benchmarks (47 percent) are covered in Set A; 25 lessons are interdisciplinary - science, social studies, mathematics, and fine arts, library, and English Language arts.

The Capacity Committee, co-chaired by Jennifer Sheets and Carl Wick, discussed a draft of amendment to Rule 3301-20-01, professional conduct, and information about stipends for Ohio teachers who have received National Board Certification.

Following lunch the Board heard updates from members and committee chairs, and conducted a Chapter 119 Hearing on the following rules:

-Rule 3301-27-01 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Qualifications to direct, supervise, or coach a pupil activity program, of the Ohio administrative code.

-Rule 3301-51-27 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Cooperation with other organizations to coordinate Service Delivery to Multi-need Children.

-Rule 3301-51-28 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Procedures for determining reimbursement for educational services to severely multiply handicapped children.

-Rule 3301-69-06 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Establishing grants for the adolescent pregnancy program.

-Rule 3301-69-09 of the Ohio Administrative Code, public preschool grants.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2005 the Board heard reports on federal and state legislative initiatives from Carl Wick and Emerson Ross, and the Territory Transfer Process Subcommittee recommended that the Board conduct a study of the impact of the proposed creation of the Peebles Local School District.

The business meeting of the State Board of Education was then called to order by President Sue Westendorf, and the Board immediately went into Executive Session. After lunch the Board reconvened to hear the report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Dr. Susan Tave Zelman, on visits and collaborations with Ohio's colleges and universities. The topics covered in these visits has included professional practices and standards, identifying an integrated methodology for instruction that includes content and classroom management, and discussion with higher education faculty about high school preparation for college level work.

The Board then heard public participation on agenda items, and took action on 8 personnel items, two territory transfer requests, and the following resolutions:

*approved a resolution of intent to amend Rule 3301-53-01 of the Ohio Administrative Code, minimum standards for chartering county board of mental retardation and developmental disabilities special education programs.

*approved a resolution of intent to amend Rule 3301-55-01 of the Ohio Administrative Code, minimum standards for chartering special education programs in state developmental centers and hospitals of the Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities and the Department of Mental Health.

*approved a resolution of intent to adopt standard scores indicative of advanced, accelerated, proficient, basic and limited skill levels on the third-through eighth grade reading and mathematics alternative assessment for students with disabilities; fourth grade writing achievement alternative assessment; fourth grade mathematics and sixth grade reading and mathematics alternative proficiency tests, and the Ohio Graduation Tests in writing, reading, mathematics, social studies and science.

*approved a resolution of intent to adopt lesson set A in Foreign Language, Fine Arts, and Technology.

*approved a resolution to accept the recommendation of the Territory Transfer Process Subcommittee to conduct a study on the impact of the proposed creation of Peebles Local School District in Adams County.

The Board then considered Old Business, New Business, Miscellaneous Business, Board Member Reports, Public Participation on Non-action Items, and adjourned.

For information about the State Board of Education meeting, please contact the Ohio Department of Education (614) 466-4838 or visit the ODE web site at http://www.ode.state.oh.us/board/

5) Ohio Fair Schools Campaign to Meet:
The next meeting of the Ohio Fair Schools Campaign will be on Monday, April 25, 2005 from 1-3:00 PM at the office of the Ohio AFL-CIO, located at 395 East Broad Street in Columbus.

6) New Report on Teacher Effectiveness:
The School Redesign Network released on April 15, 2005 a new study called "Does Teacher Preparation Matter? Evidence about Teacher Certification, Teach for American, and Teacher Effectiveness" prepared by Linda Darling-Hammond, Deborah J. Holtzman, Su Jin Gatlin, and Julian Vasquez Heilig of Stanford University, School of Education. The new study shows that "....certified teachers produce stronger student achievement than teachers without preparation, including Teach for America recruits." The study measures a large student-level data set from 1995 -2002 from Houston, Texas, which links student characteristics and achievement with data about teachers, including certification status, experience, and degree levels. For more information about the study visit http://www.schoolredesign.net/binaries/(teachercert.pdf

7) EPI Briefing Paper on Charter Schools:
The Economic Policy Institute released another briefing paper on charter schools on April 15, 2005. The report, "Advantage None, Re-Examining Hoxby's Finding of Charter School Benefits", by Joydeep Roy and Lawrence Mishel, reanalyzes a 2004 report on student achievement prepared by Caroline Hoxby of Harvard University. The new analysis shows that Dr. Hoxby "reached erroneous conclusions" as a result of failing to properly weight the impact of poverty and race on student achievement. The EPI report also shows that charter schools do not have a significant positive impact in either math or reading scores overall, and students attending charter schools are less likely to be minorities. The report is available at http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/bp158.

8) Bills Introduced the Week of April 12, 2005:
SB 122 (Ray Miller) Makes an appropriation for the provision of state matching funds for federal TRIO programs at Ohio institutions of higher education for the FY 2006-2007 biennium.

Back to TOP

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To: LWVO
From: Joan Platz
Education Update for April 11, 2005

1) 126th General Assembly:
The House Finance and Appropriations Committee, chaired by Representative Calvert, worked this week on changes to HB 66 (Calvert), the $51.4 billion state operating budget for FY06-07. The committee accepted a substitute bill on April 8, 2005 that included recommendations from the Republican chairs of the House Finance and Appropriations subcommittees, which had been meeting over the past several weeks. The committee then heard more testimony on Saturday, and considered over fifty amendments, including several omnibus amendments to the bill, presented during a Sunday session.

The House Finance and Appropriations Committee reported the bill out Sunday evening, paving the way for the bill to reach the House floor for consideration this week. The following are some highlights of HB 66 (House Finance Committee version) regarding education, prepared from the Legislative Service Commission "Comparison Document" and amendments added on Sunday evening:

BASIC AID

*Overall SF-3 funding for school districts increases by approximately 2.0 percent in FY 2006 and 1.9 percent in FY 2007, and provides $18.0 million in FY 2006 and $19.0 million in FY 2007 for the special education catastrophic cost subsidy.

*Removes the funding components proposed in the Executive Budget, and provides annual increases of 2.2% for a formula amount of $5,283 in FY 2006 and $5,399 in FY 2007. The per pupil amount in the Executive Budget was $5,325 and $5489, which represented annual increases of 3.1% and 3.0% respectively.

*Delays until FY07 the phase-in of the four base funding supplements for school districts (but not joint vocational school districts).

*Delays the elimination of the cost-of-doing-business factor adjustment until FY 2007.

*Returns to the use of current year ADM only and provides for two ADM counts, one in May of the prior fiscal year for use during the first six months of the fiscal year and the second in October of the current fiscal year for use in the last six months of the fiscal year.

*Delays a guarantee until FY 2007 and bases the guarantee on FY 2006 total base. Each school district's combined state and local shares of the base cost (including the base funding supplements) is not less than its combined state and local shares of the base cost in FY 2006.

*Adds to each district's base cost charge-off one-half of the amount of total payments the district receives in lieu of taxes under tax exemptions granted by a municipal corporation, township, or county.

*Provides a 2 percent increase in DPIA in FY 2006 to all districts receiving DPIA in FY 2005, except those that are on the DPIA guarantee which are flat funded. Delays and revises the changes made by the executive proposal. Implements a renamed disadvantaged pupil impact aid (DPIA), poverty-based assistance, and a poverty indicator in FY07; and phases most programs in at 50 percent in FY07.

*Extends the phase-in of parity aid by providing a phase-in percentage of 80% in FY 2006 and 85% in FY 2007.

*Specifies that the weights for special education and related services weighted funding continue to be paid at 90% for FY 2006 and FY 2007, the same phase-in percentage as in FY 2005.

*Provides increases of 2% per year to school districts receiving transportation funding in FY 2005, and increases the local share of transportation by 2% per year also, instead of using the formulas.

FISCAL/FUNDING POLICIES

*Establishes a new, three-year payment to phase out the charge-off supplement to school districts that become ineligible for the charge-off supplement after passing property tax or income tax levies in FY 2005 or thereafter. Such a district would receive 75% of their prior year's payment in the first year, 50% in the second, and 25% in the third.

*Sets up a mechanism by which school districts and joint vocational school districts will be reimbursed for their tax revenue losses due to the phase-out of the tax on machinery and equipment and the acceleration of the phase-out of the tax on inventories. Reimbursement is provided through a combination of higher state aid resulting from districts' decreases in valuation (state education aid offset) and direct reimbursement.

*Creates the School Employees Health Care Board and Health Care Fund in the state treasury to design and fund life and medical plans for public school employees.

*Permits school districts to levy up to 8 mills at a maximum growth rate of 4 percent, voter-approved property taxes not subject to the H.B. 920 for not more than for seven years.

*Authorizes municipal corporations to levy income taxes to be shared with an overlapping school district.

ASSESSMENT

*Specifies that the elementary achievement tests generally cannot be administered earlier than Monday of the week of May 1 beginning in the 2006-2007 school year, and requires ODE to return test results to school districts within 60 days after the test administration or June 15, whichever is earlier.

*Eliminates the requirement for the State Board of Education to adopt diagnostic assessments for third grade science and social studies, and for any subject in grades four through eight.

VOUCHERS

*Creates the Educational Choice Scholarship Program. This program provides 18,000 scholarships in FY 2007 of up to $4,000 to students in grades K-4, up to $4,500 to students in grades 5-8, and up to $5,000 to students in grades 9-12. These amounts will be increased annually based on the Consumer Price Index. Students who were enrolled in a public school (including a community school) in the year prior to obtaining the scholarship and whose resident districts are in academic watch or academic emergency are eligible for scholarships. The scholarships may be used to attend registered nonpublic schools. A scholarship student is eligible to continue receiving scholarships through the twelfth grade. The participating nonpublic school must administer state assessments to measure student progress. Students enrolled in the Cleveland Municipal School District will continue to be eligible for the Pilot Project Scholarship Program.

Scholarship students will be counted in the ADM of the resident school district to qualify for state aid, similar to the method used to fund community schools. The amount of the scholarship will then be deducted from the state aid of the resident district. The ODE is required to disclose on districts' SF-3 forms the aggregate and per pupil differences between the districts' state base cost funding, and what it would have been if the scholarship students had not been included in the districts' ADM.

*Expands the Pilot Project (Cleveland) Scholarship Program to eleventh and twelfth grade students who received a scholarship in a previous year. Recommends funding of $19.2 million in FY 2006 and $20.5 million in FY 2007 for the Pilot Scholarship Program.

COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

*Establishes a statewide cap of 25 plus the number of such schools on the bill's effective date, until July 1, 2007, on the number of startup community schools sponsored by the school districts in which the schools are located.

*Extends the current statewide cap on the number of startup community schools sponsored by entities other than school districts for two years to July 1, 2007, and increases the cap to 250 (from the current 225) for that period. Exempts from a 250-school cap any new charter school that serves dropouts, and any charter schools sponsored by a state university.

*Creates a one-year moratorium on the establishment of new Internet- or computer-based community schools ("e-schools").

*Limits an entity to sponsoring up to 35 community schools, but permits ODE to increase that limit up to 50 schools. Requires ODE to assume sponsorship of any schools in excess of the number an entity is allowed to sponsor.

*Requires students, other than kindergartners, to have been enrolled in a public school for at least one semester out of the previous three school years prior to enrolling in an Internet- or computer-based community school ("e-school").

*Disqualifies Internet- or computer-based community schools ("e-schools") from receiving state parity aid or DPIA (which the bill renames as "poverty-based assistance") payments, including payments for all-day kindergarten. Directs ODE not to deduct from school districts' state accounts any parity aid or poverty-based assistance on behalf of e-school students. (Retains e-schools' eligibility for state base-cost, special education, and vocational education payments, potential shares of federal funds, and gifted units.) Saves approximately $2.0 million in DPIA and $4.0 million in parity aid.

ATTENDANCE

*Requires school districts to report any student who is absent from school without legitimate excuse for 21 consecutive days or, if the student's school operates under an alternative attendance schedule, for 105 consecutive hours.

*Requires ODE to remove any student absent without a legitimate excuse for 21 consecutive days or 105 consecutive hours from a district's formula ADM for school funding purposes.

*Requires ODE to remove a truant student plus the equivalent of one additional student from a school district's formula ADM if that school district has failed to report a truant student.

*Requires the Department of Education to conduct annual audits of the ADM information reported by a random sample of school districts.

GIFTED EDUCATION

*Maintains Executive Budget for Gifted Pupil Program to be used for gifted education units not to exceed 1,110 in each fiscal year, and earmarks $4,700,000 in each fiscal year to be used as an additional supplement for identifying gifted students; up to $940,000 in each fiscal year for the Summer Honors Institute for gifted freshman and sophomore high school students; up to $65,800 in each fiscal year for the Ohio Summer School for the Gifted (Martin Essex Program).

*Removes the earmarks for up to $564,000 in each fiscal year for research and demonstration projects.

PSEO

*Specifies that the purpose of the PSEO is to provide enriched education opportunities that are beyond the opportunities offered by the students' high schools.

*Requires reimbursement from a student or a student's parent for state funds paid to a college for a course in which a student does not obtain a passing final grade.

*Disqualifies students in nonchartered nonpublic high schools and students enrolled in physical education college courses from enrolling in Option B (the state pays for high school student enrollment in college courses for both high school and college credit) of the PSEO program beginning with the 2006-2007 school year. These students are still eligible to participate in Option A of the PSEO program whereby students or their parents pay for courses and earn only college credit.

*Maintains from the Executive Budget that after July 1, 2005, a high school student must be a resident of Ohio to participate in the Post- Secondary Enrollment Options Program (PSEO).

TAX CHANGES

*Provides an additional $10,010,000 in FY 2006 for a total of $38,810,000 and an additional $70,210,000 in FY 2007 for a total of $351,010,000 for direct reimbursements to school districts and joint vocational school districts for losses due to changes in tax policies.

*Reduces the property tax on existing machinery and equipment and by 50% in TY 2006 and completely eliminates the tax beginning in TY 2007. Exempts all machinery and equipment installed after TY 2004 from taxation. Accelerates the current phase-out of the tax on inventories by reducing the assessment rate on inventories from 21% in TY 2007 to 14% in TY 2008, 7% in TY 2009, and 0% beginning in TY 2010.

*Phases out the tax on furniture and fixtures over five years beginning in TY 2006, and adds the tax value loss from this phase-out to the reimbursements in the executive proposal.

REDUCTIONS IN FORCE

*Allows boards of education and governing boards of educational service centers to reduce the number of teachers for financial reasons.

*Expands the reasons for which these boards may reduce the number of non-teaching employees to include the same reasons the board would reduce the number of teaching employees. Specifies that it is the intent of the General Assembly that the provisions authorizing reductions in force for financial reason of teachers and non-teaching employees apply to existing collective bargaining agreements.

2) Testimony Presented Regarding Am. Sub. HB66:
Several individuals and representatives of organizations presented testimony on Am. Sub. HB66 last week.

Barbara Shaner, representing the Ohio Association of School Business Officials, Fred Pausch, representing the Ohio School Boards Association, and Donna Boylan representing the Buckeye Association of School Administrators, testified on the tax components in HB66 and their effect on school districts. According to Mrs. Shaner, the proposed changes in the tangible personal property tax is a significant public policy decision. "This institutes a major shift from business taxpayers to residential and agricultural property taxpayers to support the public schools." The mechanism to replace lost revenue due to the changes in the tangible personal property tax should provide 100 percent replacement funding "...with district by district, dollar for dollar replacement, on a permanent basis. This is the only way to prevent school districts from being forced to maintain their programs by seeking additional local real estate taxes."

Mrs. Shaner also noted that the repeal of the 10 percent rollback on commercial real property "... could have an adverse effect on a district's ability to pass levies in the future."

Ann Sheldon, Executive Director, Ohio Association for Gifted Children (OAGC), submitted written testimony to the committee on Am. Sub. HB66. The testimony focused on the elimination of the Gifted Research and Demonstration earmark of $564,000 in FY06 and FY07. According to Mrs. Sheldon, "The Gifted R&D funds are an essential part of providing best practice models for school districts in Ohio. Most districts do not have the gifted staff to be able to develop these models on their own."

Gifted R&D funds have been used to support several important projects in a number of Ohio school districts. These projects may have been too costly for the districts to implement on their own, and would not have been possible without the Gifted R&D funds. The following are some examples:

Developing a Comprehensive Continuum of Services: Partner districts include Antwerp Local, Cambridge City, Maumee City, Pickerington Local, and Salem City.

Differentiation for Gifted Students in the Regular Classroom: Partner districts include Centerville City, Marlington Local, New Albany-Plain Local, South-Western City, and Switzerland of Ohio.

Acceleration Policy and Implementation: Partner districts include Buckeye Local, Lakota Local, Sandusky City, Southern Local, and Sugarcreek Local.

Identification of Gifted Students who are Under represented Minorities of Economically Disadvantaged: Partner districts include Batavia Local, Beavercreek City, Cleveland Heights-University Heights, and Toledo City.

Identification of Gifted Students with Disabilities: Partner schools include Columbus City, Streetsboro City, and Wayne Trace Local.

Identification of Gifted Students with Limited English Proficiency: Partner districts include Hamilton City, Lorain City, and Parma City.

3) Federal Update on Education:
-More Flexibility for No Child Left Behind Rules: U.S. Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, announced on April 8, 2005 that the US Department of Education would grant some flexibility in implementing the rules for the No Child Left Behind Act to states that demonstrate efforts to achieve the goals of law. Flexibility will be considered for up to 2 percent of students who need alternate assessments and modifications to show progress. This 2 percent will be in addition to the current 1 percent cap on the inclusion of proficient scores for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities and already take an alternate assessment. For more information about the new policy please visit http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2005/04/04072005.html

-The U. S. Senate announced last week the names of Senators who would be on the House-Senate conference committee on the FY06 budget bill. The Senate conferees are Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado, Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, Senator Patty Murray of Washington, and Senator Paul Sarbanes of Maryland. The conferees from the US House may be named next week. Both the House and Senate approved their versions of the FY06 budget in March 2005.

4) State Board of Education to Meet:
The State Board of Education, Sue Westendorf President, will meet on Sunday, April 10, 2005 at the Marriot North Hotel in Columbus, and on April 11-12, 2005 at the Ohio School for the Deaf, 500 Morse Road in Columbus, OH.

The Board's Executive Committee, chaired by Sue Westendorf, will meet on Monday, April 11, 2005 at 8:15 AM in the Conference Room at the Ohio School for the Deaf, 500 Morse Road in Columbus, Ohio and discuss the Board Retreat, which is scheduled for June 2005; the Territory Transfer Process; and review a request to present to the Board information about the Gates Foundation's investment in Ohio high school reform.

At 9:00 PM the full Board will convene to discuss assessment development, which will be led by Mitch Chester, Assistant Superintendent for Policy and Accountability, Stan Heffner, Associate Superintendent, Center for Curriculum and Assessment, and Judy Feil, Director of the Office of Assessment.

The Achievement and Capacity committees will meet at 11:30 AM. The Achievement Committee, co-chaired by Mike Cochran and Jim Craig, will review resolutions regarding special education; standard scores for alternate assessments; OGT standards setting; exemplar lessons for foreign language, fine arts, and technology; and discuss amendments to Rule 3301-13-07, honors diploma, Rules 3301-3-01 through 3301-3-07, data acquisition sites, Rules 3301-50-01 and 3301-101-01, and amending Rule 3301-15-02, school district accountability.

The Capacity Committee, CO-chaired by Jennifer Sheets and Carl Wick, will discuss a draft of amendment to Rule 3301-20-01, professional conduct.

Following lunch the Board will reconvene at 1:30 PM to hear updates from the following members, committees, and topics

-Executive Committee, President Sue Westendorf
- Achievement Committee, Michael Cochran and Jim Craig
-Capacity Committee, Jennifer Sheets and Carl Wick
-NASBE Update, Jennifer Stewart, Central Area Director
-NASBE Study Group on Secondary Literacy, Emerson Ross
-Quality High School Subcommittee, Carl Wick
-School Readiness Task Force, Eric Okerson
-Board Report and Discussion
-Alternative Licensure for Principals and National Board Certification Stipend, Marilyn Troyer, Associate Superintendent, Center for the Teaching Profession.
-Review of Written Reports - Community School Sponsors Application Status Report, Steve Burigana, Chief Operating Officer
-Items for Vote at the Business Meeting: 8 personnel items, 2 territory transfers; 2 administrative rules; 2 miscellaneous resolutions

A Chapter 119 Hearing will be held at 4:00 PM on the following rules:

-Rule 3301-27-01 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Qualifications to direct, supervise, or coach a pupil activity program, of the Ohio administrative code.

-Rule 3301-51-27 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Cooperation with other organizations to coordinate Service Delivery to Multi-need Children.

-Rule 3301-51-28 of the Ohio Administrative Code, Procedures for determining reimbursement for educational service