Let's talk about these Senate budget amendments

They were due Friday, but I only got through them yesterday. Debate doesn't begin until Monday, though, so you still have time to contact your Senator's office to enlist their endorsement. As the Senate sorts their amendments by topic, you can find all the education-related ones here.

As per usual, if you're looking for earmarks, you're on your own: these are ones that impact more than one district and in K-12. Opining, as per usual, is entirely mine. 
Also there are several "let's have a foundation budget review!" amendments, which I am going to give their own blog post. 

On inflation:
Amendment 743 just straightforwardly adds the $217M (Thank you, Senator Moore!) which is the amount the jointly endorsed MASC/MASS/MTA/AFT-MA solution would cost.

Amendment 758 puts in $100M for "inflation relief," though it specifies that it would not go into base aid in future years, which rather misses the point.

The rest of these don't fix anything for this year:
Amendment 735 would establish an escrow bank, where any year where inflation was over 4.5%, the difference would be "banked" to be distributed in years when it was less.
Amendment 644 uses the calculation requested, but starts it in 2026. 
Amendment 798 uses the calculation requested, and, while it doesn't specify 2026, since it conflicts with the language the budget outlines, per Section 3, it wouldn't go into effect this year. 

Other Chapter 70 and core aid related things:
Showing his usual zest for amendment, Senator Tarr has submitted Amendments 615 for $125, 618 for $120, and 619 for $110 per pupil minimum aid. And this is your ongoing reminder that every increase makes it more likely that fewer districts will escape hold harmless during the implementation of SOA remaining, and that this funding has no relation to student or municipal need.

Amendment 666 is chapter 70 "extraordinary relief" of $18.5M, targeted only at places where the required local contribution is more than 30% of local revenue

Amendment 799 is $5M in relief "municipalities who rank in the lowest 10% of municipalities in both of the following categories: (i) total per-pupil dollar expenditure; and (ii) actual net school spending." This means it won't be the highest need districts, as those have required per pupil expenditures that are higher.

School choice:
Amendment 720 would raise the per pupil amount of a school choice student from $5000 to $7500.

Rural aid:
Amendment 631 would raise it from $15M to $17.5M

METCO:
Amendment 635 would raise it from $29.4M to $33M and would also allow funds to be carried to the following December

Charter school facilities:
Amendment 709 would raise the charter school facilities per pupil amount (which comes from a sending district's Chapter 70 aid) to $1288 from $1188

Regional transportation:
Amendments 623 would raise it to $106.5; 661 and 734 and 748 to $121.1M

Special education and circuit breaker:
Amendment 705 would phase in circuit breaker being 100% reimbursement of the "extraordinary" costs, with 75% for FY25 moving to 80% in FY26, 90% in FY27, 95% in FY28, and 100% in FY29, but would immediately put 100% into place for any children whose parents or guardians do not reside in Massachusetts or who are placed outside their hometown.

Amendment 639 would study the delivery of special education services

Vocational:
Amendment 611 would move the CTE line from $2.5M to $3.5M; 711 to $4.5M

Amendment 663 would move transportation reimbursement for out of district vocational from $1M to $2M

Amendment 751 would require a vocational admissions lottery

Amendment 752 would create vocational annexes to comprehensive high schools in cities

Amendment 755 would create a commission on such annexes

Advanced Placement:
Amendment 622 would increase the AP math and science line from $2M to $3.3M

Amendment 654 would require state colleges and universities to take an AP score of 3, 4, or 5 for credit

Early college:
Amendment 708 would take the early college line from $3M to $3.5M

Amendment 731 would create a five year strategic plan on early college in the state

Sex ed
Amendment 756 would require biannual collection of sex education in districts in the Commonwealth

Early literacy:
Amendments 687 and 780 would raise the "Literacy Launch" amount from $10M to the $30M that would match the Governor and House

Amendment 787 is the terrible literacy bill that would mandate curriculum be taken from a state list

SEL:
Amendment 640 would increase the SEL line from $6M to $8M

School to career:
Amendment 714 would increase the school to career line from $7.3M to $8.5M

After and out of school:
Amendment 665 would increase the budgeted $8.6M to $10.6M

Diversity in education:
Amendment 689 would student the impact of layoffs of this year and last on teachers of color

MSBA:
Amendment 760 adds "collaboratives" to the study of the MSBA that the Senate included in the outside section (starts on page 67)

Trusts:
Amendment 621 would increase the civics trust from $1.5M to $2.5M

Amendment 750 would increase the genocide trust from $2.25M to $3M

Let's look at Senate budget amendments!

The state senate takes up budget deliberation this week, and the amendments that they are considering are posted online.

Please consider this my annual appreciation that the Senate sorts budget amendments by topic. 

Let's look at the amendment proposals that would impact more than one district. (You're on your own on earmarks; I loathe them!)

589 and 590: I'm actually pretty sure Senator Tarr understands why minimum per pupil increases are not great public policy, BUT he also is concerned about year over year increases by district, so he has filed both an $80/pupil and a $100/pupil increase (as he often does).

591: Senator Tarr with 95% regional transportation reimbursement

592: Senators Cronin and Tarr adding $750K for Reach Out and Read

593: Senator Moore doubling the line for hate crimes

594: Senator Moore bringing Mass Academy's line back up to $2M (as it was in the Governor's budget)

596: Senator Moore on a study on access to vocational programming

600: Senator Brownsburger on special ed: doubling the pothole account (to $500K) and correspondingly bumping the bottom line of circuit breaker to $504M

601: Senator Moore EXEMPTING MSBA from the (Senate) cap of $1.2B

602: Senator Moore ADDING $75,000,000 for MSBA Accelerated Repair

603: Senator Gomez adding $100K to the AP Stem account

606: Senator Gomez with a "Whole Child Grant Program" of $50M that would be used for librarians, nurses, school counselors (of various kinds), a community school program, professional development, and/or diversifying the workforce. This deserves its own post.

606: Senator O'Connor requiring DESE to require new teachers be trained in "all approved programs for teachers include instruction on the appropriate use of augmentative and alternative communication and other assistive technologies"

609: Senator O'Connor also making the minimum per pupil $100

611: Senator Tarr with $10M in one time foundation assistance for communities with large jumps in local contributions

614: Senator Gobi putting regional transportation at $107M

622: Senator Feeny wanting $100K for a history day

623: Senator O'Connor wanting a foundation budget review commission every two years with the next report coming next June

624: Senator Tarr wanting a study on the delivery of special education services

625: Senator O'Connor adding $250K for economic literacy PD

627: Senator Tarr wanting a study on controlling transportation costs, including "the facilitation and authorization of purchasing collaboratives for school transportation"

628: Senator Barrett with $1.45M for military mitigation

636: Senator Timilty, continuing the regional transportation bidding war, goes for $110M

638: Senator Lewis wanting a study on nutritional standards in schools

645: Senator Crighton adding about $400K to after and out of school

647: Senator Feingold including language for bonding for school buildings under MSBA not counting towards the levy limit

648: Senator Tarr adding science labs to the green energy grant

649: Senator Tarr adding $2M to a social emotional grant (that's currently $6M)

651: Senator Rausch adding another $1M to the civics trust fund (at $1.5M as proposed)

653: Senator Rausch creating a reserve fund of $50M for increasing paraprofessional wages by vote of both the school committee and the municipality to a living wage as calculated by the MIT calculator

657: Senator Collins added $500K for the JFK Museum

662: Senator Collins adding $1.5M for school to career connecting activities 

669: Senator Lovely adding $10M in extraordinary relief for local required funding increases

698: Senator Payano adding $50 per student to the charter school reimbursement 

700: Senator Tarr wanting a study on minimum aid districts

703: Senator Miranda bumping METCO to $32M

705: Senator Finegold wanting to add $100M for projects that haven't been invited to the MSBA program through a DESE-administered program

715: Senator Feeney adding $3B (I checked the zeros twice) specifically for vocational education construction projects

721: Senator DiDomenico adding $1.1M for safe and supportive schools

723: Senator Rush adding a grant of $375K for hands-only CPR

744: Senator Oliveira also wanting $100 per pupil minimum

748: Senator Jehlen increasing the $550K for MCIEA to $750K

749: Senator Oliveira wanting a study of special education costs

House FY20 budget amendments

As always, I post only amendments that have statewide impacts; if you're looking for an earmark, you're on your own.

Amendment 12 would add $100K to the budget for the Berkshire County Task Force, which has been looking at further cooperation and possible regionalization among Berkshire County schools and districts.

Amendment 27 adds $300K for Bottom Line which counsels first generation students to and through college.

Amendment 44 would bump regional school transportation reimbursement to $92,320,633, which I assume is fully funding (note this is a substantial jump, as it is in at $73M).

Amendment 71 would establish a new grant line of $15M for expansion or establishment of new preschool programs.

Amendment 95 is for the creation of a Regional Schools Foundation Budget Review Commission; the language here is interesting, by the way, as part of it says it would look at is inequalities between towns in regional districts. Regional districts, though, were formed through local efforts, not state ones. Do regionals really want the state weighing in on their inequalities?

Amendment 101 calls for a commission on two generation approach to early childhood education (parents and children).

Amendment 123 adds $1M for the creation of school-based health programs.

Amendment 162 for $200K for expansion of Alliance for Inclusion and Prevention’s training and workforce development for trauma treatment for students in Boston and Gateway Cities.

Amendment 165 (h/t Rep. Malia) pushes the recovery high line back up to where it was last year.

Amendment 243 would create a Lead in School Drinking Water Trust Fund for $20M.

Amendment 244 boosts the McKinney-Vento line to $27M (which, as $9M was 37%, I imagine is intended to be full funding).

Amendment 248 authorizes use of the water pollution fund for school deleading.

Amendment 311 boosts the after and out of school programming from $3.5M to $10M.

Amendment 324 outlines circuit breaker reimbursement of up to $50K in such a way that it probably only applies to Watertown, the district of the reps proposing (?).

Amendment 340 is the "thank you but we'd like to see ALL increases in charter tuition be reimbursed, not just when it is higher than five years" amendment that you may have been seeking! Good work from Rep. Ultrino! 

Amendment 441 a "technical amendment" on the teachers' retirement system, which appears to be more than that but I don't know the current language well enough to tell you what the change is. Check it if this matters to you. This mirrors a bill filed by the Mass Teachers' Retirement Board that would allow a one-time window for a change in status (Retirement Plus or not) of teachers; when some teachers switched systems (if, for example, they had been a paraprofessional), not all options were necessarily made clear and there were glitches. This would give them a chance to switch. h/t to excellent source! 

Amendment 480 would add back in $3.4M for the non-resident transportation reimbursement left entirely out so far.

Amendment 482 would allow districts to charge a fee for students who attend out-of-district vocational schools at the same level as any such fee charged in-district students, and with no fee for students whose families are at or below 300% of the federal poverty level.

Amendment 514 takes that $16.5M pothole for low income students and bumps it to $126M, adding $110M! Nice one, Rep. Higgins! 

Amendment 581 would establish a Foundation Budget Review Commission every five years.

Amendment 606 wants to add $1.5M for the Civics Projects Trust fund.

Amendment 615 would boost charter mitigation to $126M, which I assume is closer to where it would need to be if you're actually going to reimbursement all districts.

Amendment 619 adds the oddly specific amount of $930,932 to the early college line...

Amendment 626, however, then allocates that as Governor Baker did as an addition to the foundation budget! This is the first I've seen of someone working on the foundation budget! 

Amendment 636 appears to be just changing language and time on the allocation of the Bay State Reading Institute.

Amendment 638 would add $1M in planning grants for new vocational programs.

Amendment 707 has something to do with transporting children in DCF care back to their schools of origin, but I can't tell what.

Amendment 716 bumps the school breakfast line to $5M (from $4.8M) and does not add an earmark.

Amendment 734 would take the $1.75M early college line and make it $3M as it was in the Governor's budget.

Amendment 819 would bump the school to career connecting activities to $5M (from $4.5M).

Amendment 831 boosts the yearly cap on spending of the Mass School Building Authority to a new $750M for 2020 (it's $602M otherwise), with growth then tied back to what it has been (the lower of growth in dedicated sales tax revenue or 4.5%).

Amendment 840 would add $150K for financial literacy.

Amendment 857 is one that I don't understand why it never gets through: it allows DESE to pay teachers and administrators if they're working for the Department.

Amendment 865 is essentially a lines of authority clarifier, that those applying for the low income grants need superintendent approval.


Amendment 883 adds additional funding for youth homelessness.

Amendment 924 raises the early college pathways from $1.75M to $3M.

Amendment 932 would also boost regional school transportation reimbursement but by $5M.

Amendment 946 (h/t Mike LeBrasseur; I missed this one!) would have circuit breaker kick in at 3 times the statewide average per pupil cost of foundation, as opposed to 4 times, as it is now.

Amendment 992 would bump the minimum per pupil aid to $50/pupil (oddly, this does not correspondingly change the chapter 70 line, which would need to be changed).

Amendment 1099 would bump Safe and Supportive Schools by $100K.

Amendment 1115 would add $3M for trauma kits in public buildings and then require them.

Amendment 1150 would add $5M in rural school aid (for districts with not more than 21 students per square mile).

Amendment 1183 would allow those who are 17 at the time of the preliminary election but would be 18 at the time of the general election (and are registered to vote) to vote in the preliminary election.

Amendment 1192 bumps early college high schools from $2M to $4M.

Amendment 1231 amends the "not less than" to $1M (from $250K).

Amendment 1279 would just straight boost Chapter 70 by $100M.

Amendment 1360 would just create a $5M pothole fund for changes in Chapter 70.

Supreme Judicial Court takes Fair Share off the ballot

You can read the decision here. The crux is that it asked two things.

We conclude that the initiative petition should not have been certified by the Attorney General as "in proper form for submission to the people," because, contrary to the certification, the petition does not contain only subjects "which are related or which are mutually dependent," pursuant to art.

But I'll leave you with this:

We recognize that recommendations of this scope and size will need to be phased in to be affordable. However, we also note again what was stated at the beginning of this document: that the good work begun by the education reform act of 1993, and the educational progress made since, will be at risk so long as our school systems are fiscally strained by the ongoing failure to substantively reconsider the adequacy of the foundation budget, We therefore urge that the legislature act on these recommendations with a profound sense of the risks and opportunities at stake for our shared prosperity as a state and, as our constitution acknowledges, the critical nature of education to the health of our democracy. We advise a keen sense of the urgency when it comes to addressing the identified funding gaps, and the moral imperative of reducing the remaining achievement gaps.

The moral imperative didn't vanish with the ballot question.

Senate FY19 budget amendments

The Senate sorts their budget amendments by topic, so this is lots easier! Rather than go line by line, I'm going to arrange these by topic, because some of the hot topics have several amendments (and in many cases, several amendments by Senator Tarr); as always, these are only K-12 and only statewide amendments (not checking earmarks here):

Foundation budget:
...FBRC has been submitted as amendment 236 from Senator Tarr and 238 is to require it every five years
and 249 hands out $30M of any consolidated net surplus to FBRC implementation, Massachusetts Community Preservation Trust Fund, and the Massachusetts Life Sciences Investment Fund .

Per pupil minimum increase:
The House passed a $30/pupil minimum increase; the Senate Ways and Means budget proposes the same (do I need to remind you that these increases aren't progressive?).

• 157 from Senator Tarr proposes $40/pupil
• 158 from Senator Tarr proposes $50/pupil
• 159 from Senator Tarr proposes $100/pupil

Charter schools:

• 205 from Senator Jehlen would require that the fiscal impacts of charters on sending districts be considered in the granting of charters
• 262 (same) would prevent the creation of charters without that
• 311 from Senator O'Connor for $125M for charter school reimbursement (I believe that is full funding)

Special education:

• 201 from Senator Tarr would use ACTUAL NUMBERS (average of the prior five years) for the foundation budget calculation
• 223 from Senator Keenan would tie Ch.766 program tuition lines to the cost of inflation
• 250 from Senator Tarr is a special education net services study
• 297 from Senator Brownsberger adds $250K of extraordinary relief to the circuit breaker 

Regional transportation:
The Senate Ways and Means budget funds regional transportation reimbursement at $62.5M, when the House settled at $63.5M. Thus it's not suprising that there are several amendments:

• 161 from Senator Tarr for $86M
• 162 from Senator Tarr for $77.4M
• 163 from Senator Tarr for $73M
• 242 from Senator Gobi is for $71M
• 237 from Senator Tarr is a regional schools and transportation study 
• 294 from Senator Friedman would make recovery high schools regional schools for the purposes of transportation reimbursement 
• 315 from Senator Tarr would create a study of both regional transit and regional transportation

The battle of line 7061-9400 
It is Senator Tarr moving to amend back to DESE's preferred $32M and including history for the MCAS line. You knew someone would. 
On the other hand, Senator O'Connor-Ives amends it to $13M in amendment 265

Rural schools:
Amendment 317 from Senator Hinds creates and amendment 318 funds rural school aid; adds $3M to the bottom line

The rest:

• 160 from Senator Creighton would raise Mass Mentoring to $750K
• 165 from Senator Tarr puts dyslexia into the MGL
• 167 from Senator Creem requires the change in meal change policies that USDA already required be passed and published by back to school
• 168 from Senator Montigny funds Best Buddies at $500K
• 169 from Senator DiDomenico adds $600K for Safe and Supportive Schools
• 176 from Senator Eldridge would bump adult ed $3.5M to $34.5M
• 177 from Senator Eldridge would create a two generation education commission (parents and children both in school)
• 178 from Senator Eldridge would add a social worker loan repayment program
• 179 from Senator Crighton bumps the ASOST-Q Grant to $5.5M and puts in a pilot for community service sharing 
• 182 from Senator deMacedo outlining which group homes need particular licensing (and I don't know enough about this to tell you more than that)
• 183 from Senator Crighton for $1M for summer learning programs for low income students
• 185 from Senator Rush bumps Reading Recovery $500K
• 186 from Senator Eldridge establishes a water bottle refilling grant program for schools (I like this one!)
• 190 from Senator Tarr wants MSBA to create "rules, regulations and guidelines for the inclusion of installation plans of an indoor active shooter gunshot detection and alerting system" for schools building with MSBA 
• 202 from Senator Tarr adds $5M for the now-required substance abuse screening 
• 213 from Senator Jehlen bumps the innovation school line from $100K to $200K; 243 from Senator Tarr does the same BUT ties the funds up with STEM, extended learning, and such
• 214 from Senator Jehlen bumps the MCIEA innovative asssessment line from $200K to $400K
• 216 from Senator Collins bumps the school to career line from $4M to $4.5M
• 224 from Senator Boncore just straight adds a Reach Out and Read line for $1M, requiring a match
• 239 from Senator Tarr  adds $100K for empowerment zone grants
• 244 from Senator Tarr bumps the literacy lines about $150K
• 246 from Senator Tarr creates an unfunded mandate task force
• 247 from Senator Lewis adds $50,000 for a gifted and talented needs assessment at the state level
• 260 from Senator Rush would require 20 minutes of recess
• 276 from Senator Boncore (clearly at the direction of Stand for Children) would add $700K to the reading lines but make them competitive programs 
• 295 from Senator Lesser would study the wait list of vocational schools (with a view to fulfilling them)
• 296 from Senator Brownsberger adds $1M to METCO (bringing it to the House $22.1M) 
• 302 from Senator Fattman adds a pothole account for midyear ELL students (in the law; no money added)
• 303 from Senator Fattman would create a carbon monoxide detector fund for schools (no money)
• 308 from Senator Tarr would phase in a required breakfast after the bell program for schools that are majority low income 
• 316 from Senator Rodrigues bumps the AP line $300K to $2.8M
• 
  

The list on 246 is growing

I updated this on Twitter twice today, but they're still rolling in. This is now 40% of the House.

Debate of the Resolutions: 2017 Delegate Assembly at the MASC conference

Posting today from the MASC Delegate Assembly down that the Joint MASS/MASC Conference. The resolutions they are considering today can be found here.
reading of the resolutions is waived

Looking for more motion on FBRC?

Call your Senators and ask them to co-sponsor Amendment 75, which would implement recommendations and set up movement in future years.
Or you can use MASC's handy "send an email" function.
I hope to get to a full rundown on amendments...

I missed an amendment!

This is what I get for trusting the Senate classifications!
Amendment 120 from Senator Chang-Diaz puts numbers on the Foundation Budget Review Commission recommendations! Each year, as part of the budget, the specifics of the chapter 70 calculation need to be spelled out. This amendment subs in the FBRC recommendations for implementation over time (not this year, but it gets in!).
We need this one! Send along your recommendation to your senator ASAP!

Senate budget amendments

The Senate budget amendments are now posted. The Senate (bless them!) sort their amendments by subject; you can find the education-related amendments here.
The K-12 related amendments (that are not for a particular district) are as follows:

• amendment 121 would increase regional transportation reimbursement from $59M to $63M (which would be 80% reimbursement); amendment 174 would increase it to $61M (73% reimbursement)
• amendment 127 would allow for districts to establish a special education reserve fund
• amendment 189 would raise the amount budgeted on dual enrollment to $2M (from $1M) 
• (not K-12, but) amendment 139 would double the early education salary reserve to $20M
• amendment 140 would raise the non-resident student vocational transportation reimbursement from $1.75M to $3.28M
• amendment 142 would provide "extraordinary relief" for districts "whose special education costs exceed 25 per cent of the total district costs and whose tuition and other circuit-breaker eligible costs...exceed both $1,000,000 and 25 per cent of all tuition and other circuit-breaker eligible costs"
• amendment 146 would change how charter school reimbursement is allocated when not enough is allocated to fully fund, fully funding the capital component and pro-rating the rest.
• amendment 148 would increase the line for regional bonus aid from $110,000 to $278,000
• and there it is! amendment 149 would increase the kindergarten grant back up to $18.5M (level funded from last year and what passed the House); amendment 202 would also do providing further than grants per classroom don't annualize to more than $18,000/; amendment 256 would increase to $23.9M
• amendment 158 would add $100,000 for civic education and engagement
• amendment 162 (without an amount added) would implement an early elementary literacy improvement grant
• amendment 167 would increase school-to-career connecting activities from $2.8M to $5.4M
• amendment 168 would establish a commission to study best practices and costs of serving low incident special education population
• amendment 170 would establish an ELL circuit breaker account for districts that experience at 20% increase (or more) over the previous year
• amendment 175 would put the Foundation Budget Review Commission on a three year cycle with the next report due November 1, 2018; amendment 260 would establish a foundation budget review commission to report out every 4 years (and, coming in from Senator Tarr, this one has broader parameters, including early childhood ed, and funding for teachers salaries at rates to attract and retain quality candidates)
• amendment 177 would establish a $500,000 STEM school to career grant for vocational schools
• amendment 178 establishes further parameters for special education costs within the circuit breaker (it widens who is allowed to apply)
• amendment 189 adds $500,000 for a safe and supportive schools grant
• amendment 190 increases McKinney-Vento transportation reimbursement from $8.3 (level funded) to $24.3M; amendment 254 would increase it to $20.8M
• amendment 193 the "Princeton Pothole Amendment" would allow for reimbursement for a community (Princeton is offered as an example) that "has made significant over payment of minimum local contribution and experienced extreme hardship due to said over payment over three or more consecutive years within the last 10 years.”
• amendment 196 would eliminate the requirement of the use of District Determined Measures in evaluations 
• amendment 199 would study the delivery of special education services
• amendment 202 would expand the John Adams tuition program to non-public school students who voluntarily take the MCAS
• amendment 217 (from Senator Joyce) would make Randolph a Commissioner's district (?)
• amendment 218 would add a bunch more districts to those eligible for pothole funding
• amendment 226 would add $1M to the Parent Child program, bringing it to $14M
• amendment 228 would ensure fully McKinney-Vento reimbursement for districts that spend over $800,000 on it
• amendment 229, Senator Tarr wants to set aside $850,000 for charter schools' negatively impacted by the new economically disadvantaged calculation 
• amendment 231 would raise charter reimbursement to $90M; amendment 255 would increase it to $133M; amendment 258 would increase it to $100.9M
• amendment 232 would require two hours of suicide awareness training for all school personnel
• amendment 235 would provide for a process for getting waivers for unfunded mandates
• amendment 238 provides $150,000 for the Berkshire County Regional Task Force 
• proving that they are certainly well connected, amendment 241 would put the JFY Networks $700,000 of funding in (see my notes on the House budget)
• amendment 244 increases the funding for the inclusive concurrent enrollment to $2M and requires a report on it from DESE
• amendment 246 would create regional schools foundation budget review commission 
• amendment 248 would increase METCO funding to $23M from just over $20M
• amendment 251 from Senator Tarr would move the consolidated net surplus (in thirds) to the Community Preservation Trust fund, the Life Sciences Investment fund, and the implementation of the foundation budget review commission; amendment 257 and amendment 259 also from Senator would also establish alternative ways for funding the foundation budget review commission findings  (it's not clear to me that any of these have enough funding to do any such thing)
• amendment 252 requires a report on the educational stability of foster children
• amendment 262 increases the innovation schools line to $1M but adds a number of new parameters 

The Senate begins deliberations Monday. 

House amendments coming in: UPDATING AS THEY COME IN

You can find them here.
As of yet, nothing on the foundation budget.


UPDATE: a few of note (and updates as available; note that I am writing up only those amendments that impact more than one community; amendments that would build a playground in a particular town and the like are not included below):
Second update: as of this evening, there are 1307 amendments. All those having to do with PreK-12 education are below:

• Amendment 387 would implement a permanent Foundation Budget Review Commission that would report out every three years, with the next report due January 2018.
• Both amendments 353 and 436 would amendment McKinney-Vento up to $24M and $20M respectively : UPDATE add 523 also for $24M and 960 for $20.8M
• Rep. Harrington has in amendment 436 moved that minimum per pupil aid be moved to $100. 
• Amendment 441 moves regional transportation reimbursement from $60M to $65M.
• Rep. Sannicandro in amendment 440 adds transportation of students at recovery high schools as a requirement BUT ALSO provides for their reimbursement. 
• Amendment 678 would, in cases of major student enrollment increases, extend the student enrollment reporting deadline to December 15.
• Amendment 696 from Reps Decker and Smizik would disallow the use of student assessment data in teacher evaluation; if you're interested, I'd read the language, as it's pretty specific.
• Disappointingly, amendment 702 is directed to not allowing undocumented students to have in-state tuition. The three sponsors are Lombardo of Billerica, O'Connell of Taunton and Diehl of Whitman, for future reference.
• Amendment 731 increases the dual enrollment line to $2M.
• Amendment 761 would reimburse districts for the cost of IT changes necessitated by MCAS 2.0. That's from Rep. Orrall who has been outspoken in opposing the change in testing (and the Common Core, which we'll come back to).
• Amendment 802 would create a commission to look at the education of children with low-incidence disabilities, with the aim of educating them better and with less cost.
• The Turning 22 program support is raised to $7M by amendment 811.
• Amendment 845 was the one we were tweeting about earlier today, coming in from Rep. Ultrino of Malden: full (as best as we can tell) funding of the charter reimbursement line item at $134M. Amendment 1232 raises the reimbursement to $95M.
• Amendment 912 which raises math and science AP support back to $3.2M also has a number of co-sponsors; it has some fairly substantial language attached, so read it if this is of interest.
• Amendment 950 for targeted intervention is raised to $8.4M from $7.3M
• Rep. Peisch sets aside $150,000 for healthy relationships work in schools in amendment 961.
• Amendment 974 from Rep. Peisch raises the assessment account back up to $29.5M.
• Rep. Ferguson of Holden amends the pothole for districts that are struggling this year with unrepresented poverty by allowing districts to also look for funding for "significant overpayment of local minimum contribution" which has caused hardship. That's amendment 977.
• Amendment 979 increases the Quality K grant from $18.5M to $23.9M; amendment 946 raises it to $23.9M; Rep. Mahoney's amendment 1151 also increases Quality K, but to $18.8, reserving at least $1M for the Worcester Public Schools.
• Amendment 990 is $575,000 for the Safe and Supportive Schools grant
• Amendment 993 from Rep. Peisch reinstates the MCAS low-scoring support at $4.2M.
• Rep. Pesich adds "non-profit career technical institution" to those eligible for dual enrollment in amendment 1021.
• Amendment 1035 adds funding reimbursement for out-of-district vocational transportation.
• Reimbursement for early education has been a big concern, and amendment 1103 raises that line from $10M to $20M; there are a lot of co-sponsors on that one.
• Transportation is added to the special education circuit breaker in amendment 1039.
• Quite a number of co-sponsors (including most of the Worcester delegation) of $500,000 for alternative education in amendment 1058.
• Amendment 1082 increases the circuit breaker for special education from $276M to $283M.
• The John and Abigail Adams Scholarship to public colleges and universities in Massachusetts for those students who do well on the MCAS would be extended to private school students in amendment 1096.
• Amendment 1109 establishes a commission on McKinney-Vento transportation; amendment 1116 holds that any Gateway district spending more than $800,000 on such transportation must be fully reimbursed.
• Amendment 1110 adds $120,000 in the department of agriculture line specifically for Farm to School.
• Amendment 1202 increases vocational dual enrollment to $2M from $750,000.
• Amendment 1209 increases early ed by $2M, provided those $2M are spent on Level 3 and 4 districts.
• Head Start goes up by $1M in amendment 1205.
• There is $10M set aside to work on the early education waitlist in amendment 1212 from Rep. Livingstone from Boston.
• Amendment 1270 and 1273 both from Rep. O'Day; the former sets aside $4M to work on housing for unaccompanied homeless youth; the latter puts aside $150,000 to take a look at the scope of the need.
• Rep. Orrall puts in amendment 1294 what she has previously filed as a bill: a reversal of the 2010 vote of the Board of Education on the Common Core. I'd be interested if it's actually possible for the Legislature to do this, as the setting of standards is a power reserved for the Board of Education in Massachusetts.
• Amendment 1301 is directed at Greenfield Virtual Charter; if my count is correct, it cuts this sentences from MGL Ch 71, sec. 94: "In the case of a commonwealth virtual school that is established by a school district, not less than 5 per cent of the students enrolled in the commonwealth virtual school shall be from the school district that established the school." This had come up at the Board of Ed, and it would have the effect of NOT limiting the number of students from Greenfield.
• Rep. Peisch in 1303 sets aside $200,000 for preschool planning grants. 

And that's what I've found.

Debate of the Rise Act in the Senate

You can find the bill here. My summary is here. You can find amendments here; my cheat sheet is here. 
updating once we start. The Senate President just gaveled them in and is doing recognitions.
The gallery is filling up; among those here, Secretary Peyser! Not kidding.
just regular business so far. They have the doors to the balcony open. 

AS OF NOON: Senate stands in recess...and we don't know for how long...

2 pm: back in they come....more as anything happens. Rumors have been rife. 
Senate minority asks for summoning of quorum

Amendments to the Rise Act UPDATED

The following is simply drawn from my notes on the amendments filed to the Rise Act, so I can following along during tomorrow's deliberation (which I plan to liveblog and tweet). I don't promise that they represent all the nuances that may be in each, but they at least hit the main point. The name indicates the main sponsor of the amendment.

1. Moore: local approval for charters required for local funds to be used; no local approval=state must fund directly
2. -withdrawn-
3. Flanagan: charters must follow ch. 30B in purchasing
4. Flanagan: district and charter must agree on start times, and district (always) only responsible for 50% of transportation costs
5. Brady: no cap lift on charters
6. Brady: no change in the Level 3 schools language
7. Lewis: specifies ELL and special ed data as being part of subgroups to be considered in evaluation; also improvement plans must be compiled by district
8. Rodrigues: charters eligible for MSBA funding
9. L'Italien: tightens "at risk" language on charters that can exists as alternative over the cap; also drops "opt-out" from lottery language (the term, not the concept)
10. L'Italien: "high risk" language only for high school (grades 9-12, not 7-12); insists on "early warning system" not a replacement
11. L'Italien: like 3 in requiring ch 30B NOW WITHDRAWN
12. O'Connor Ives: similar to 10 in tightening alternative ed language
13. Chang-Diaz: calls on DESE to establish regs for lottery; provides for regional charters to be included in a lottery 
14. Chang-Diaz: requires reporting on reasons for students who leave (both district schools and charters)
15. Keenan: special commission on dyslexia
16. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): report by DESE on innovations of charters
17. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): plan for all students reading at grade level
18. Tarr* (co-sponsored by L'Italien): no solicitation or gifts for families applying to charters
19. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): Board of Ed can reconsider granted charter in 6 months if not meeting requirements 
20. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): requires a 30 day confirmation that new charters are meeting their requirements
21. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): provides for Board revoking charter if charter is not meeting requirements 
22. Tarr: requires regs for Ch 71 Sec 89 (MGL on charter schools) and regs for waivers of charters not meeting suspension and attrition requirements
23. Rodrigues: substitute bill (S.2208)
24. Tarr: establishes a charter working group
25. Chang-Diaz: adds date to requirement of charters to abide by Ch 222 (date discipline reg changes were implemented)
26. Moore: requires state to fund charters directly; funds increases to charters on 100/50/25 basis
27. Pacheco: no cap lift through Sept. 1, 2018
28. Ross: foundation budget funding for special ed from prior five year ACTUAL average (both in-district and out-of-district)
29. Chang-Diaz: calls for study of effective and efficient funding (per FBRC recommendation)
30. Humason: charter regional transportation depends on full funding of regional transportation reimbursement
31. Chang-Diaz: defines in-district and out-of-district rates for special education (per FBRC)
32. O'Connor Ives: revamps innovation fund (from section 1) for innovation schools and Horace Mann charters
33. Welch: adds end time to what must be agreed upon between charters and districts for transportation
34. Barrett: advanced notice to charters if they aren't lining up with district attrition rates
35. Barrett: advanced notice to charters if they aren't lining up with suspension rates
36. Barrett: alternative education exempt from attrition quotas
37. Barrett: provides for Board to waive attrition quota
38. O'Connor Ives: covers collective bargaining within the Level 3 section
39. Barrett: provides for Board to waive suspension quota
40. Pacheco: requires retroactive approval locally of charter schools
41. Barrett: provides for charters to remediate their suspension and/or suspension data
42. Barrett: eliminates requirement for charters to meet with superintendent and have local hearing with school committee
43. Barrett: requires DESE to do impact analysis (not district)
44. Barrett: paraprofessionals
45. Barrett: paraprofessionals
46. Barrett: paraprofessionals in Levels 3, 4, 5, respectively (44-46)
47. Dorcena Forry: deals with excessing of teachers (as is done in Boston)
48. Chang-Diaz: drops the double of "regulation by Board" language (simple language edit)
49. L'Italien: puts charter schools under school committee oversight; requires that school committee members not be part of charter school (teacher or the like)
50. Spilka: cleans up the math of the foundation budget calculations (doesn't change anything of recommendation) AND SOME LATE ADDITIONS!
51. Tarr: substitute bill (S.2210) does create a foundation budget commission; doesn't reform charters
52. Chang-Diaz: adds "fully" to districts receiving mitigation.

* I should perhaps note that Senator Tarr represents Gloucester; it appears their experience with a charter school has stayed with him.

That's not how this works (on funding the FBRC report)

From a Bay State Banner interview with Governor Baker in which he commented that his budget is going in the right direction:

In this 2016 fiscal year, the Baker administration put an additional $111 million into Chapter 70 funding, which helps support district schools and is tapped to support charter schools. This represents a 3 percent increase — the highest amount the state has ever provided to municipalities, says the Baker administration. 

The increase is not great enough to bring baseline school funding to the levels they should be within one year but may be on track to close the gap in four years, according to the recommendations of the Foundation Budget Review Commission.* 

No, it isn't.

The increase in last year's Chapter 70 funding was largely caused by two things: changes in enrollment (more kids plus more kids with special education or ELL needs, and other foundation level changes) and inflation (which last year was 1.5%). That chapter 70 increase also includes the minimum increase given to non-foundation communities, which last year was $25/pupil**.

The enrollment changes, the inflation rate which should be observed and the years in which it was not (the rate is negative; inflation isn't), and, I suspect, the communities which receive the minimum increase aren't going to vanish because someone decided to deal with the Foundation Budget Review Commission Report. Further, none of those things are dealt with in the two cost drivers specifically cited by the Banner: special education and health insurance.
The costs in the FBRC are OVER AND ABOVE the minimum regular foundation budget increases. So, no, last year's much-touted $111 million increase over four years isn't going to cover the needs of the FBRC, or even of the two biggest drivers of the FBRC.

But there are a couple of things that I'd suggest the Legislature could be working on even this year around starting to deal with the report:

• Inflation: a slightly negative inflation rate in no way reflects the actual costs of running a school districts. Whether the state decides to change how this rate is calculated--and I would suggest that they should--this year, when the accepted rate is set at something slightly negative, but the general budgetary assumption should be something more than 2%, would be an excellent chance for the Legislature to make up some of the ground lost in the years the state set the rate otherwise. 
• Low income: as I've hammered on at some length, unless the state intends to go for yet another year of using everyone's old numbers (which I believe puts some districts on FY14 numbers), they need to redefine low income in the MGL. Given the substantial negative changes some districts saw in their numbers, I'm not sure that, say, Worcester's estimate would fly. The Legislature should recognize, however, that if there are a substantial number of kids being missed through the Economically Disadvantaged calculation, they're being missed for more than a calculation on lunch, and there needs to be a broader (not-just-DESE) effort to find them. Then maybe numbers like WPS (and others) would work.
• ELL: This is the only one in which a clear number change tied to particular kids was part of the report. That's as straightforward as it gets.

I've heard a number of suggestions that the state could only have the sort of funding needed to substantively deal with the report if the Fair Share amendment passes. Maybe. The concern there is it kicks the whole issue out a few years. The school districts still have kids to educate and budgets to balance now, though; it can't wait.

Don't believe, however, that having the regular chapter 70 increases is somehow magically going to do that.

*The phrasing here is a little deceptive; I don't think the paper intends to suggest that the report said that the gap could be closed this way in four years, but it could easily be read that way.
**Note that this is not actually part of the foundation budget in any way.

Foundation Budget Review Commission: Board of Ed

Chester turns it over to Wulfson, Hatch, and King
Wulfson who explains FBRC, which I'm not going to take notes on
creating a constitutional obligation for the Commonwealth to support its public schools
cites $800M change of the foundation budget on sped and health insurance
change on local spending may not be an increase (they may already be funding at that level)
need to be phased in over time
"just recommendations at this point in time...go to Governor and the Legislature for this point in time"
step up our efforts to collect detailed and useful data on how districts are spending their dollars "from a program management standpoint"
wide differences in how districts spend their money
"potential additional funding is not unlimited"
Stewart: ELL and economically disadvantaged
"seems at least ELL seems relatively easy to figure it out, organizing it is going to be a challenge"
Wulfson: two areas that the commission highlighted as a priority
health insurance and special ed are mandatory: already getting budgeted
not looking to drive dollars into those categories, but dollars in budget for other activities can be freed
"sort of a domino effect"
Doherty: fair to say that we can always spend our money more wisely
pretty clear that the Commission feels the foundation budget ought to be increased
"bottom line is, if we are really going to fulfill our responsibility Constitutionally, we need more money"
would like to consider something:this board ought to be wrestling with funding issues
ballot inititative to raise the tax on millionaires
think the Board of Ed would be right to ENDORSE this
Chester: question of if it is appropriate, "which I guess would have a legal dimension to it and maybe a policy dimension"
will do some homework
"certainly the Board has in my tenure here has supported, encouraged, particular legislation"
Stewart: I know most of our budget is ch 70
Wulfson: like 95% of it is Ch 70
Stewart: "maintenance" in the budget going forward?
Wulfson: maintenance budget is part of the exercise that agencies go through with finance
"what are we required to do by law?"
level funding or built in increases (like circuit breaker)
collective bargaining increases would be built into maintenance
Stewart: there's some percentage going forward in next budget
Wulfson: ch 70 gets a lot of special attention
"inflation adjustment we always built into our preliminary estimate" though it is very low this year
(in fact it is negative this year)
per pupil minimum aid is not part of maintenance (as it isn't part of ch 70)
Wulfson: whether we have enough to move forward with any of these proposals remains to be seen
Chester: FBRC is not a report to this body; we can revisit it if the Board wants
Moriarty: would absolutely highlight the second paragraph in the conclusions: has to be more frequently reviewed

FY14 Budget House Amendments

The House last night had a number of amendments to the House Ways and Means budget proposed. Ones that are of particular interest to Worcester are:

• Amendment 323, filed by Rep. Peisch (D-Wellesley), and Amendment 860,
  filed by Rep. Marjorie Decker (D-Cambridge). Increase funding for
  income-eligible children for preschools to FY13 levels.

• Amendments 627, 628 and 633, filed by Rep. Tony Cabral (D-New Bedford).
  Provide additional funds to schools in Gateway Cities for early literacy,
  English language learners and career academies.
  
• Amendment 465, filed by Rep. Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley). Revive the
  Foundation Budget Review Commission to determine the adequacy of
  educational programs necessary to achieve state education standards and to
  assess how resources can be used most effectively.

(That last is our perennial favorite, the adequacy study!)

The first two are of direct budgetary interest to Worcester; they're an attempt to try to make some of the additions that Governor Patrick had proposed in his budget. They would, if funded, make a real difference to the Worcester budget.
I'm going to be contacting our delegation today to urge them to support these. I'd ask that you do the same. And do it SOON: these will be moving!