Kansas Court Could Kill the Right to a Decent Public Education

I suppose we could call this the "Brown versus Brownback" debate.

California governor Jerry Brown has a very different approach from Kansas governor Sam Brownback.

The Washington Bridge scandal involving Governor Chris Christie has proven that our elected and appointed officials are willing to harm the public to advance their personal and political agendas. Schools are targets as much as bridges.


Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback answers questions about education funding. Brownback and legislators are waiting for a Kansas Supreme Court ruling on whether the state is spending enough money on its public schools. (AP Photo/John Milburn)

Kansas Court Could Kill the Right to a Decent Public Education
Bill Moyers and Company
January 9, 2014

In 2012, tea party-aligned legislators in the reliably red state of Kansas, backed by deep-pocketed outside groups, were able to purge Republicans they viewed as insufficiently devoted to Governor Sam Brownback’s right wing agenda. Since then, Kansas, like North Carolina, has become a test bed for conservative policy-making.

Deep spending cuts to education, health care and other social services were central to that agenda. And this month, the Kansas Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in a lawsuit precipitated by those cuts which could have profound consequences for public education in America.

In The New York Times, David Sciarra of the Education Law Center and Wade Henderson of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights write about what’s at stake…

Kansas, like every state, explicitly guarantees a free public education in its Constitution, affirming America’s founding belief that only an educated citizenry can preserve democracy and safeguard individual liberty and freedom.

And yet in recent years Kansas has become the epicenter of a new battle over the states’ obligation to adequately fund public education. Even though the state Constitution requires that it make “suitable provision” for financing public education, Gov. Sam Brownback and the Republican-led Legislature have made draconian cuts in school spending, leading to a lawsuit that now sits before the state Supreme Court.

The outcome of that decision could resonate nationwide. Forty-five states have had lawsuits challenging the failure of governors and legislators to provide essential resources for a constitutional education. Litigation is pending against 11 states that allegedly provide inadequate and unfair school funding, including New York, Florida, Texas and California.

Many of these lawsuits successfully forced elected officials to increase school funding overall and to deliver more resources to poor students and those with special needs. If the Kansas Supreme Court rules otherwise, students in those states may begin to see the tide of education cuts return.

Kansas’ current constitutional crisis has its genesis in a series of cuts to school funding that began in 2009. The cuts were accelerated by a $1.1 billion tax break, which benefited mostly upper-income Kansans, proposed by Governor Brownback and enacted in 2012.

Overall, the Legislature slashed public education funding to 16.5 percent below the 2008 level, triggering significant program reductions in schools across the state. Class sizes have increased, teachers and staff members have been laid off, and essential services for at-risk students were eliminated, even as the state implemented higher academic standards for college and career readiness.

Read on to see what steps the Kansas legislature may take if the court rules against it.

Budgets are a reflection of priorities, and it’s worth noting that some states are taking a very different approach. This week, California Governor Jerry Brown proposed increasing spending on pre-K education by $22 billion over the state’s 2011-2012 budget. According to the Los Angeles Times, “schools that serve low-income students and non-native English speakers will receive more money under the formula… Under Brown’s plan, LAUSD would see its per-pupil funding jump from about $7,700 per student per year to $12,750 by the end of the decade.”

Just as I suspected: Emma Leheny is back as CTA chief counsel!

CAROLYN DOGGETT AND PRISCILLA WINSLOW OUT, EMMA LEHENY IN

CTA head counsel Emma Leheny

The California Teachers Association's website has (once again) been changed to say, "The Legal Services Division is directed by Chief Counsel Emma Leheny."

Emma Leheny recently stepped away from the helm of CTA's Legal Services, apparently during some kind of a power play by Priscilla Winslow (perhaps with the assistance of former head counsel Beverly Tucker and her supporter, executive director Carolyn Doggett?)

It looks like Governor Jerry Brown stepped in to help. He appointed Priscilla Winslow to PERB, the Public Employee Relations Board. Now that Winslow has gone to PERB, Emma Leheny has resumed her position.

Why do I think Executive Director Carolyn Doggett may have supported Priscilla Winslow?

First, the two have worked together as Executive Director and Associate Director of CTA for the past couple of years.

Second, Doggett has a very long history of supporting her cronies, such as former chief counsel Beverly Tucker, even when they were engaged in illegal actions. Doggett, Tucker and Winslow are the power trio of the old guard. I'm sure Beverly Tucker's political connections are still strong. Emma Leheny obviously had trouble with the old guard, even though she has worked with them on several cases over the years, before coming to work for CTA. (I don't consider people like Dean Vogel, the president, to have much power at all, so I don't blame Vogel for the tumult. Besides, he's a nice guy.)

Third, Carolyn Doggett is finally going to release her grip on the Executive Director position at CTA. She's retiring in June 2013. I suspect she wanted to leave her cronies in charge.

Fourth, Emma Leheny and the old guard were bound to come into conflict simply because Emma has spent her entire legal career in the real world, not in the cocoon of CTA, where all the favored cronies are protected from consequences of wrongdoing by the enormous power of CTA. In fact, at CTA ethics is defined as not blowing the whistle, no matter what happens. More than one official has told me it would be unethical to report wrongdoing, including crimes. Emma is more aware of the threats presented by the real world to lazy, overconfident union lawyers. Carolyn Doggett

Carolyn Doggett announces retirement
California Educator
Volume 17 Issue 4
December 2012

CTA Executive Director Carolyn Doggett announced she will retire in June 2013, closing a 45-year career in public education...

COMPETITION HEATS UP FOR SCHOOL TAX MEASURES

COMPETITION HEATS UP FOR SCHOOL TAX MEASURES
Analysts say three initiatives could confuse voters
Michael Gardner
Union-Tribune
Feb. 21, 2012

Tax initiatives at a glance

• Brown’s initiative would temporarily increase the state sales tax by a half-cent on the dollar and hike the personal income tax rate for those earning more than $250,000. The money would go to schools, public safety and other services.

• Molly Munger, a wealthy civil rights attorney and Pasadena resident, has collaborated with the California PTA to propose an income tax rate increase for nearly every Californian that would gradually escalate depending on earnings. Those revenues would be sent directly to local boards, avoiding the Legislature’s grasp. Most of the increase is dedicated to K-12 and 15 percent for preschools and child care programs. It would expires in 12 years. Munger actually has two similar measures pending and her team will decide later which one to push.

• The California Federation of Teachers, joined by the California Nurses Association, targets the wealthy by raising tax rates by 3 percent for those earning $1 million and 5 percent for filers with incomes of more than $2 million. Revenues would go to schools, colleges, senior programs, roads and public safety. It, too, bypasses Sacramento by sending the money to school boards and other local governing bodies. The increase would be permanent.

SACRAMENTO - Unless someone blinks, voters could face three competing measures on the November ballot that will ask them to raise taxes in the name of schools.

The individual merits of each have been largely overshadowed by growing warnings that the powerful sponsors — Gov. Jerry Brown, teacher unions and the PTA among them — must either coalesce behind a single initiative or risk having voters turn down all three.

Better one than none is the advice.

“The more measures on the ballot, the greater the chance for voter confusion. And confused voters tend to vote no,” Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College, said in an email.

Added Larry Gerston, a political scientist at San Jose State University: “The anti-tax folks are going to let the three sides duke it out and take great glee in knowing they will confuse everyone so much that the ‘no’ side won’t have to work very hard.”

So far, admonitions urging compromise have not been heeded by Brown and supporters of the other measures who have deep convictions and, in some cases, deep pockets to finance the looming campaigns.

“The question is what’s best for our kids,” said Bey-Ling Sha, a San Carlos mother of two boys and the executive vice president of the San Diego Unified Council of PTAs who backs an initiative to increase the income tax on almost everyone, but which puts the biggest bite on the wealthy. The measure is being spearheaded by attorney Molly Munger, a civil rights advocate.

“If a deal could be cut that would be better for kids, sure. But I don’t see that happening. At some point, you have to trust the democratic process,” added Sha, a San Diego State University professor.

Jim Groth, the San Diego-based representative on the California Teachers Association board, said there is still time to reach a deal. But Brown’s supporters, such as the CTA, are convinced their measure — which raises the sales and upper income taxes — will have the broadest coalition because it also helps public safety and social services. While the other measures fund programs beyond K-12, Brown’s has the most diverse distribution list...

Torlakson: School Survival Depends on Brown Budget

"Once pitched as a lush revenue stream that would augment the state's education budget, the lottery contributes only 1 ½ percent of school funding, said CTA board member Jim Groth."
--(This sentence was removed from the original article. See Google result below.)

Torlakson: School Survival Depends on Brown Budget
By Rebecca Rosen Lum
San Bruno Patch
March 15, 2011

Flanked by students bearing signs that read “Where’s our bailout?” and “Yea in May,” State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson barnstormed in support of Gov. Jerry Brown's budget in San Bruno Tuesday.

Dubbed “Red Tuesday” because March 15 is the date by which school districts must let teachers know they've been targeted for layoffs in the coming school year, the “day of action” at Portola Elementary School provided a supportive backdrop for Torlakson and other speakers who condemned the 12 preliminary pink slips handed out in the San Bruno Park School District, at least 60 in San Mateo County and nearly 20,000 statewide.

“I urge legislators to act in a bipartisan way,” he said. “They can choose whether we will slide to the bottom of the western industrial world or rise again back to the top.”

The budget, which closes a $27 billion deficit, proposes to raise $12 billion in tax extensions and fee renewals, and by cleaving another $12.5 billion through a variety of cuts. Voters would have to approve the proposal in a special election in June.

Without the extensions, the schools budget could be gutted by as much as $4.5 billion, or 10 percent...



Google result:

Torlakson: School Survival Depends on Brown Budget - San Bruno, CA ...
- 8:16am
Jerry Brown's proposed budget in a press conference at Portola ... Once pitched as a lush revenue stream that would augment the state's education budget, the lottery contributes only 1 ½ percent of school funding, said CTA board member Jim Groth. .... Contribute. + Send us news tips; + Put an event on the calendar ...
sanbruno.patch.com/.../torlakson-school-survival-depends-on-brown-budget

The Governor's Retort: Cities have an obligation to help fund schools

Click on this link to get the original article with lots of wonderful links: Morning Report: The Governor's Retort
January 25, 2011
Voice of San Diego
by Andrew Donohue

The San Diego leaders fighting Gov. Jerry Brown's plan to kill redevelopment have a simple, digestible argument: Sacramento should get its grubby hands off of our local money and solve its own problems.

Looks like Brown, though, might have just one-upped them.

He's framing the debate in a different way: His plan takes $1 billion away from redevelopment and gives it to the state's ailing schools. Scott Lewis takes that a step further and shows how education was originally supposed to be the very check and balance against redevelopment abuse, but Prop. 13 did away with that.

People like Mayor Jerry Sanders and Councilman Kevin Faulconer have big dreams for San Diego's redevelopment money - things like Convention Center expansions and football stadiums - and are fighting hard against the governor.

"But Brown has now illustrated better than ever before that the money for these dreams comes from education more than anything," Lewis writes. "The state will continue to plow money into education but it's time for downtown and other redevelopment areas to do their part.".

And the Blight Beat Goes On

• Faulconer got six of his colleagues to join him in waving their fists at the governor on Monday night, though they have yet to engage in the last-second redevelopment binges that other cities have enjoyed.

• Our Liam Dillon, meanwhile, is waving his fist right back at the city's downtown redevelopment agency. He's begun our latest public records battle — Blight Watch.

That agency, the Centre City Development Corp., has refused to turn over documents that go to the very core of the agency's continued existence. Agencies have 10 days to turn over documents after a public records request except in extraordinary circumstances. It's been than seven weeks and all we're hearing is that "it's complicated."

We'll be dialing up the pressure this week to ensure that the public records do indeed become public.

• There's another aspect of redevelopment suddenly getting attention now that it's in jeopardy: affordable housing.

One CCDC official recently made the bold claim that his agency had created more affordable housing units than all of Los Angeles' redevelopment areas combined. We fact checked it and here's what we found: A big fat "false."...