National Teachers Unions Drop $3 Million More To Protect Failing Schools
The groups that believe the only solution for schools is “more money” have sent almost $3Million more to Georgia in order to protect the status quo and continue to trap children in failing schools and rob them of future economic opportunity. The October filing is out, showing the following contributions given to the “Committee To Keep Schools Local“:
The American Federation of Teachers:
$200,000 on 10/5
$50,000 on 10/25
The National Association of Educators:
$1,900,000 on 10/6
$500,000 on 10/20
$300,000 on 10/26
Total non-local money for “local” schools: $2,975,000 in October
Add this to previous $2Million from the NEA and you’re looking at $5 Million spent from national teachers unions that suddenly are concerned about keeping Georgia’s schools “local”. These groups have been shameless about casting profit motive dispersions behind Amendment One, which I attempted to debunk yesterday.
For those of you from right-of-center circles who love to shout “follow the money” as much as you enjoy “local control”, ask yourself this question: Why are D.C. Teachers’ unions suddenly so interested in local control here in Georgia? And why is it worth $5 Million of teachers’ union dues to protect the 4% of Georgia’s schools that are failing from change?
For bonus points, ask yourself if you think these groups will still be on the side of local control in January when the QBE reform plan centers on moving teacher compensation from the state to locally elected boards of education (with the same or more funding that each district currently gets). Spoiler alert: Come January, these groups will forget all about the words “local control”.
About Author
Charlie
Founder of GeorgiaPol.com; Now weekly columnist Very interested in Georgia and Georginas. Interest in politics is waning daily.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I think you make many valid points about hypocrisy here, that’s probably a spot on prediction for the future of this conversation.
I still can’t support a situation where my school could be brought under the OSD and I have no idea what that means for me.
I also think that it is perfectly legitimate to bring up increased funding when Georgia has suffered some of the largest post recession budget cuts on a per student basis in the nation.
I would like to see you back up your last statement with specific numbers, because I think it’s way off base. Georgia’s schools took the lightest share of budget cuts relative to other state departments, and have had more than $1.5 Billion of funding added in the last four years. All austerity cuts should be gone with this year’s budget.
FWIW, the PTA also opposes the amendment.
Also, at least we know where the money for opponents is coming from. Where is money from the support group coming from?
You mean the PTA rep that’s going around to news outlets with the talking point that “the Constitution” has only been amended 27 times? I’m having trouble taking seriously the talking points of an organization that wants to influence education but doesn’t understand the difference between a state and the federal constitution.
I don’t know about talking points, but the PTA is parents, and they support teachers and they apparently don’t think this amendment supports teachers.
But of course nobody really knows what it supports. It’s just something different.
To me it’s a very trumpian response (and I say this even having a fair amount of respect for Gov. Deal). Feels like “If it’s broke, let’s break it some more and see what happens.”
The 2017 Budget reduced austerity cuts by around $300 million dollars, I believe that still leaves us about $150 million in the hole.
That’s definetly progress buts let’s finish the job before we give an unelected official compete control over our most vulnerable schools.
Took me a second to track this down, from 2008-2013 per student spending dropped by 14.8% which puts us seventh behind California at 17.3% and ahead North Carolina at 14%. This wasn’t even the beginning of the cuts. According to the Department of Education the austerity gap was $135 million in 2003 and has only grown since. Thank God we are finally making that gap back up, but I think we should see what fully funded schools can do before we start amending the constitution
And again, you’re now comparing “cuts” from 2003 which weren’t cuts, they were deviations from the QBE formula that was never, EVER, fully funded after it was passed. Even AFTER a 1% statewide sales tax was passed/increased to catch up with the plan that was passed by Gov Joe Frank Harris in the 80’s (with sales tax passed by incoming Governor Miller in the 90’s). In fact, Miller took Georgia to the highest teacher pay in the Southeast, and highest in the country when weighted on the cost of living.
And yet, even with this “MORE”, Georgia got less. We stayed at 48th-ish in the country on education despite the top spending. And the same groups piling in the $5M are again asking for “more”.
At some point, I wish people would ask what they’re getting for what taxpayers are spending. If the only way you can claim a cut is not overspending our neighbors like we were 15 years ago….again, what did we get for the increase?
We’ve got a Governor that has committed much of increased year over year revenue to education. $1.5 Billion extra just in the last 4 years. What has that gotten us? 14 year old stats and another baseless and non specific demand for “more”.
I don’t know how to look up the data, but I believe that Cobb County teachers have gotten about 5% over the past 8 years.
That is a pay cut.
So yeah, if you think you are going to get more better teachers by paying less, then go for it.
Again, facts are dangerous things.
Kyle Wingfield has some numbers:
http://kylewingfield.blog.myajc.com/2016/10/17/osd-foes-make-same-claims-that-proved-wrong-about-charter-schools/
State money went up by $350 per child 4 years after Deal took office. But locals CUT funding $60 per student.
And yet, the State is blamed for funding cuts, and the locals are the ones the teachers’ unions want to buttress with their money.
Square this circle for me please.
Facts: I just looked up the state teacher pay scale since 2013. Exactly the same every year. That means no raises for 3 years, which is as far back as I have looked. Many have also had to take furlough days in this time, which is a way of making them take a pay cut.
(Just google “Georgia teacher pay 20xx”, xx being the year you want to see.)
Now I don’t think most teachers do it for the money (starting salary of $31,500 isn’t going to attract people looking for a big payday), but to attract and keep talent they need to make a living.
It’s no mystery what needs to be done.
“Educators and education policy makers have long been advocating around a comprehensive approach to student achievement that includes access to nutritious food, mental health services, mentors and preschool programs.”
Even the charter school Super in Tennessee can describe what needs to be done:
“we’ve worked hard to develop partnerships with organizations that provide wraparound and social service supports to our students and families. We still have work to do, but I believe we are making good progress.”
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/tn/2015/04/07/chalk-talk-chris-barbic-on-leading-tennessees-achievement-school-district-and-its-daunting-turnaround-task/#.WBoSiMkW6ND
I’d like to see the link you came up with that you’re calling a fact. Georgia has provided for raises for at least the last 3 years, but the state doesn’t hire the teachers, the local systems do. As such, the local system actually decides the salary. That’s part of this “local control” that the unions aren’t going to like very much when the legislature gets back in January and they revert to form. In fact, that’s one of the points that Kyle was making in his article. The state has put in more money, and the locals took it back via reduced local taxes. That’s not the state’s fault, that’s many local systems that continue to blame the state for all of their woes, while not making the hard choices they’re elected to do.
Here’s the 2013-2014 link (it opens a pdf):
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwin86mK1orQAhXBKCYKHYugCQEQFggdMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gadoe.org%2FFinance-and-Business-Operations%2FBudget-Services%2FDocuments%2FFY2013_GaDOE_State_Salary_Schedule.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH6B-o9gXOBAQQZE3oiatH5vm49CQ&sig2=74uuLCHUGfDph9RzmnfjzA
This is the base rate as determined by the state. Sometimes a county can come up with additional money to supplement this, but that hasn’t happened much recently.
I am not disputing that some are blaming the state, but that’s not my axe to grind. The bottom line is the teachers are falling behind and claiming that paying them is just throwing more money at the problem is what I am challenging. As I said before, less than 4% of schools are “failing”. The system isn’t so broken that we need to “fix it” with an unplanned, unknown, mystery solution whose only selling point is that it is something different.
You’ve heard me say before that I believe that part of the problem is ineffective school boards and or administration. While the OSD would appear to be a way to get around those entities we can do it without opening the door to privatizing public education, which has dubious achievement everywhere. I wrote above about what experts (even charter school people) say needs to be done. It’s hard, it’s complicated, it takes commitment, just like anything else that aspires to be better. We know what needs to be done, and just throwing the ball to somebody else and crossing your fingers isn’t it.
I did not know that history and it is well taken. I think that you speak to your point that “more money” itself is often not the solution. I agree with that; but I do still have questions
Do you know how those resources were allocated? I lived in DeKalb County, how were the teachers at Fernbank compensated vs. the teachers at Rainbow?
Was the problem that at that point in time we were just throwing money at the problem? Hasn’t this money been spent to get back to normal. We had furloughed staff across the state didn’t we? Aren’t those worthwhile increases?
I agree that if the opposition to OSD is asking for more money without saying what will be done with it, then it should be opposed. But isn’t that what OSD is? You’re giving a blank check to whoever the Governor appoints. What if the Democrats win? Are there any limits to what they can decide we need to spend to fix the “failing schools”? Are yall betting everything that you win?
Of course the increases are worthwhile, and there will be another sizable increase this year, with our without OSD. I’m not arguing they are not; I’m debunking the “all this Governor does is cut education funding” talking point that has no basis in reality. Georgia’s K-12 schools got about half the year over year general fund revenue growth for the entire state the past few years. While teacher raises have been relatively small, they’ve kept up with inflation year after year when state employees went 8 years getting two single one percent pay raises. The teachers have been at the front of the line with this governor, and it’s quite insulting as a taxpayer to constantly hear that they’ve somehow been treated like step-children. Especially if you’re a friend or relative of other state employees that have generally gone without.
I don’t know the specifics of Fernbank vs Rainbow, but going back to yesterday’s column I used an example of Baneker’s cluster. Compare them with an average age of experience in teachers at 18 months. The North Fulton Schools are going to be over 10 years average seniority. Teachers are paid on a scale that is weighted primarily for years of service, plus a bump for educational attainment (masters degrees, etc). A new teacher with 18 months experience is generally not going to have a master’s degree. They’ll be at the bottom of the pay scale. So when the district asks for more money it doesn’t go to the failing school. Most of it goes to the experienced teachers and the administrators at the top of the career ladder who aren’t in the classroom. THAT is the problem with the “more money” argument. And when you start pushing back on the educators pushing this argument, they say these schools can’t be fixed until we fix societal problems. That is a bigger problem, because it signals that even though they keep saying more money will fix it, they know it won’t. Worse, they’re not willing to try. And THAT in my mind is why we have to have OSD or something similar. Because they either need to be made to try, or we need to send our tax dollars to someone that will.
I think you make many valid points. However, I still feel like I’m being asked to vote for an unknown. Sure, Governor Deal has made education a priority, but again I ask, what about the next Governor? What if a hardliner, who thinks the government had no business in education, gets elected, could his appointee just cut funding for those schools? What if a democrat who thinks there’s “no limit on how much we should spend on children”, gets elected? Could their appointee spend as much as they deem necessary? I’m not attacking the Governor; I believe I’ve referenced his spending increases many times. I’m just trying to figure out where the limits are on this thing. We are being asked to amend the Constitution, that is no small thing.
I’ve given you answers to your questions. Your conclusion tells me you weren’t interested in them, as you’re now asking me to tell you that everything will be perfect in the future, regardless whatever happens in subsequent elections.
I’m planning on addressing this point in another front page post, but as for your “if I can’t promise you perfection in perpetuity then vote no” scenario, no one can. It’s ridiculous to presume the status quo isn’t subject to those same political changes.
I’m sorry, but at what point did you tell me the limits to what can be done once a school is brought into the opportunity school district. All I’ve read is a defense of this Governor and the argument that just “more money” is not the solution, I agreed with both. I asked you twice and you never said no a liberal couldn’t spend as much as they want on “failing schools”. I’m not demanding perfection and I’m not demanding you to predict the future. All I’m asking is are their limits on the power we are giving this appointee. What guarantee do I have that someone in the future won’t go overboard with this. You’ve said that takeover is generally the last option, is that in the law, or is that left up to the discretion of the appointee? Governor Deal won’t be there forever, the powers that his successor receives are very relevant. My conclusion that I feel like I’m being asked to vote for an unknown is because I’ve never seen the limits of this outlined anywhere. As you have pointed out in local school district spending the intent often doesn’t matter after the law is written. Maybe you need to spoon feed it to me because I haven’t gotten it yet.
I’m not presuming that the status quo isn’t subject to political changes. Im presuming that if we are creating a position that has no defined limits on power, that political changes could lead to radical decisions about the future of our education and that great damage could be done without any checks on the process. If thats not what we are doing, all you have to say is, “there are constitutional limits to what can be done about these schools.” You make a convincing case for why I shouldn’t doubt the Governor’s commitment to Education, you make a convincing case for why “More Money” isn’t a solution, you have made me pretty sure that local school boards are making the decisions that we are so upset about. But you haven’t even tried to convince me that there are any limits on what the OSD superintendent can do.
Follow the money indeed. Much of the support money is dark money, thanks to Citizens United. Much of what is known of support funders is that many have big stakes in legislation or state government funding not connected to education. Filings indicate the support organization anticipates raising $9M. Did I mention that the Governor’s daughter-in-law gets a cut of the funds raised?
http://www.myajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/school-takeover-amendment-fight-a-family-affair-fo/nstxk/
Again, I ask you to go back to yesterday’s column for a “Governor’s getting rich off of a few failing schools” argument. Yep, a lot of funding is coming from people who want to be on the good side of the Governor. That’s politics. He could be using this on a lot of other matters to grow a patronage system, as I outlined yesterday. Instead, his two main consistent policy items are fixing failing schools and criminal justice reform. If you think either of those are where the money is, you’re barking up the wrong tree.
This is one of those rare times I find myself agreeing with Charlie, scary but it is the Halloween season. I sent a letter to the editor of our local paper to take to tasks some of the local politicians condemnation of the Governors plan. It is below for you indulgence or despair….
Dear Editor,
One of the most over used quotes is Albert Einstein’s “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Maybe it’s over used because it is true most of the time and in the case of Amendment 1 it is certainly true. Recently the Tribune came out with an opinion piece titled “School amendment offers no opportunity” They got that wrong it should be “Doing the same thing over and over offers no opportunity.”
We should ask why a failing school still failing after 3 years. The typical answer from school boards is they don’t have enough money which is just the old tired saying throw money at it and it will go away. More money has been tried over and over and over, and over with the same poor results. We can hold the School Board accountable by voting them out of office but this rarely happens. It was Governor Deal who had to act and replace 6 members of the DeKalb county school board. Even then there were lawsuits filed while the children continued to suffer in a seriously dysfunctional school system. Why should children suffer while the people voters hired to run their school system act like children? Was local control better for the Children of DeKalb County? Apparently not.
The article claims Amendment 1 is nothing more than a money grab. Really now. If the school board fails so badly after 3 years to run a school should we keep paying them to fail? Folks this is not how the real world works. Try that in a private sector job and the problem will be corrected much faster than 3 years. It will be fixed in 3 months by firing the cause of the problem. Judging the way the Cherokee County School system fought and continues to fight private run Charter Schools it’s no surprise they don’t like this. Governor Deal has offered a plan to fix chronically failing schools. Is it perfect, probably not but at least he offered a plan. To the people who are against Amendment 1, What’s your plan?
Charlie, you may have covered this somewhere (which I am guilty of not taking the time to check) – Does the OSD convert the schools into a charter type of school? If so, how is that fixing the problem in the school districts?
Here has been my observation. Charters have to be open to all children in that system, and as a parent you can apply to move that child into the charter. What is happening in some of the larger districts is they have taken schools that were failing either under NCLB or another state standard in the last 10 years, and converted that school to a charter, magnet, STEM, arts, ect… which requires parents to apply. So now you have some of the children in that school who do not make the cut forced into the next school over in the district, and parents in the other schools which are not in trouble, but want a specialized education (the child is musical, lets apply for the Arts charter) moved out of that school. Now the former school is no longer a failing school. Problem solved. but the school that lost children to charters and gained the ones forced out of the failing school the next area over is now failing. A few years later the district does this shuffle all over again (got to look good on state reports you know) until only small neighborhood schools in the poorest and most dangerous areas of the district left. No amount of academic clout would move a parent to a school that had 6 shooting 1000 feet from the property to place a child there if they have safer options. How does a OSD solve that failing school issue?
Does the OSD have the ability to overwrite current DOE charter and equal access rules, allowing only the children who where in the failing school to remain in that school and address that set of failing students directly? If it’s under the “apply and follow the charter rules” set of programing, could the child not be kicked out of the charter and moved back into standard school, which is the current practice in larger districts? How is this solving the issue, besides making the school look good on paper and having the state run the show?
All the schools remain public schools, even IF a charter management company is brought in to run a school that is transferred to the Opportunity School District. While the unions are trying to (un)sell this as a “school takeover plan”, a takeover is the last of several options. Ideally, the systems adopt a voluntary school improvement plan. They can enter an MOU with the state on specific steps/outcomes. A takeover is generally the last and least preferred option. That said, the students in a community school remain in that school. They’re not removed from the system so that a charter operator can claim better performance by removing the hardest cases. That’s not how public charters work, and can’t be how an OSD school can/would operate.
I completely understand that the students remain in the public school systems district. That’s not my concern. AND I’m not talking about teachers and staff. I’m talking about the actual failing children. School systems can already take over or rework a ‘school’ in their district by re-classifying it. By state rules, a specialized school has to have open enrolment to all students in the district and they have to apply and meet whatever set of rules are in that /accadamy/magnete/ third party charter. So if you had 300 children in a failing school and it becomes a STEM, magnet, third party controlled Charter, that specialized “school” is not required to take any of the students who were there when it was failing that can not fit into that reclassification set of rules for the student or parents. You can have half of the failing school children end up being dislocated out of the mentioned failing school which is being voluntarily improved to the nearest school geographically in that school system. So instead of addressing the child that is failing, that improved school is now addressing the children who are currently enrolled in said school. The failing children are now failing in the other district controlled school. Can the OSD stop a system from just reshuffling the actual children? Does if take over the “school” or the “students”? School reports assume that the ‘students’ remain in a school, and the test scores of the 3rd grades in failing school XYZ are the same group of 6th graders (with in reason) 3 years later in the “improved” school XYZ. You shuffle around enough children, and a district ends up with no options for what to do with schools that are failing but can not be reclassified.
It wouldn’t be that complicated. I’ve read that the schools just suspend the students who aren’t performing. Google “charter school suspension rates” for multiple resource links.