We have a state budget (almost)

Gin beat me to the Latin:

"Habemus rationem pecuniae," as a former Senate president who missed a state budget deadline by 104 days per NYT, might say https://t.co/9WxCvtv6ko

— Gintautas Dumcius (@gintautasd) July 18, 2018

You can download the whole 331 pages of H4800 here.
In terms of education, as just about always this budget cycle, "not bad" is the theme. The big news is that the Ch. 70 number is not only the Senate number, it also adopts the Senate language, which not only further added to health insurance implementation, it made English learners an increment above the base!
YES, that's some additional FBRC implementation motion!
If you're in Worcester, note that the conference committee taking the Senate number means there will be a revised budget with additional positions: good news!
It remains a $30/per pupil minimum increase, and 100% gap closing (which was in the Senate version as well). The Ch. 70 line also includes the House-included assistance for districts that were particularly hit by the low income change; that money is to be out to districts by September 1.

What else is going on?

• The always messy line for DESE (because everyone sticks earmarks in it) is down a bit, but it looks as though that is a matter of what earmarks are in it.
• METCO comes through at $22.1M, same as the Senate.
• The early literacy line is up $50K, a bit over $2M in total, with a few earmarks.
• It looks as though conference committee took a whole bunch of the educational earmarks and stuck them into one line item (7061-1192), so if you're checking for something, you might start there. The line totals $1.6M. The one thing of more general interest is that it includes $50K for the Berkshire County Task Force. 
• School-to-career connecting activities comes in at $5M, with some earmarks.
• The line for ELL programs is up $1M from the Senate to $2.5M.
• Institutional schools is the same as the Senate, at $7.4M.
• Adult ed comes in at $33.3M. 
• Regional transportation got the Senate W&M amount of $68.8M.
• The Senate effort to reimburse transportation for non-resident vocational students came through at $250K.
• McKinney-Vento reimbursement for homeless students took the higher House number of $9M.
• The AP line is higher than the Senate at $2.8M (Senate had $2.5M). 
• The lunch line stays at $5.3M and keeps its $10K earmark for Weymouth.
• The breakfast line is $4.9M, including earmarks.
• As above, Ch. 70 largely takes the specifics of the Senate, including the ELL language, though it also includes the $12.5M pothole for low income, which came from the House. The minimum per pupil increase is $30; 100% gap closing. 

Important point on the language in Section 3 for Chapter 70: DESE "shall submit to the house and senate committees on ways and means not later than September 1, 2018 its further recommendations for additional adjustments to the chapter 70 foundation budget calculation for fiscal years 2020 and beyond." This means the Legislature is REQUIRING A REPORT on improving reporting on the calculation of low income students BY SEPTEMBER 1. As this was among the major arguments the House was making in favor of their education funding bill, it appears the budget has now dealt with that.

• The promised $15M for districts that have students evacuated due to Hurricane Maria is included.
• Circuit breaker hits an unprecedented $319M; it really looks as though they're trying for full funding! There is a $200K earmark for Best Buddies, as well as $250K for extraordinary relief (for districts seeing extreme increases).
• District accountability audits are funded at $891K.
• The federal impact aid makes it in with an increase; now $1.4M.
• Charter reimbursement takes the House W&M $90M (the Senate had $100M).
• Innovation schools come through at $200K.
• Education data analysis is (weirdly down $1514?) $522K.
• CORRECTION: on the battle over the MCAS: $32M came through (what DESE asked for, the Governor put in, the House amended to, and the Senate didn't have): there is a specific set aside of $1M for the history/civics/social studies assessment.
• MCIEA gets the Senate (as amended) amount of $400K for development of alternative assessment and accountability.
• The Accuplacer/JFYNetworks (which at some point someone is going to figure out what they're about) line is $700K.
• Targeted intervention is up to $7.5M, though $150K of that is for youth workers in Everett and Chelsea.
• Expanded learning time is $13.9M (same).
• The line that allows DESE to actually spend the fees it collects from certification on certification rather than having it go back into the general fund made it in.
• Recovery high schools at $3.1M (same as Senate).
• After school programs at $4.2M with a lot of earmarks.
• Safe and supportive schools are up $100K to $700K.
• WPI's Mass Academy is in $1.5M
• YouthBuild comes in at the $2.4M of the Senate.
• Mass Mentoring the same $750K as the Senate.
• Conference committee did include the $56,920 in regional bonus aid. 
• Prevention of child sexual abuse is funded at the same $400K from the Senate.
• The push for rural school aid yielded real dollars this year, with $1.5M included for "school districts serving fewer than 11 students per square mile" plus a required report on future needs on such aid. 
• And the summer learning competitive grant program comes in at $500K.

The budget has to be passed by both the House and Senate, then it goes to the Governor, who may veto what he likes. We're running up against the end of the session on the Legislature's ability to override those vetoes.

UPDATE: to note that both chambers had passed the budget by the end of the day.

So what did the Legislature pass?

Yesterday, the House and Senate both passed a budget agreed to by conference committee. It was filed that morning, meaning, as noted by State House News reporter Katie Lannan:

7 hours and 56 minutes from release to enactment. #mapoli https://t.co/5JOFwHQzcS

— Katie Lannan (@katielannan) July 7, 2017

Not, let's say, a triumph for public process. Among other issues, this got us a IIA report, which puts the numbers and account numbers in a spreadsheet, which included only the House numbers, not the conference committee numbers (causing some of  us not a small degree of angst!).

The budget now goes to the Governor, who has ten days to consider it and, if he wishes, to issue vetoes, which, in its turn, the Legislature can override. In other words: we're closer, but we're not done yet.

So what's in it for public education?

Chapter 70 came back at $4.746B, which is right between the House and the Senate numbers. As best as I can tell--I have yet to find the actual Chapter 70 language on this--they did this by keeping the $30/pupil minimum increase, keeping--and possibly adding to?--the insurance increase in the foundation budget, but not taking on the Senate's special education implementation of the Foundation Budget Review Committee's recommendation. Let me emphasize that on my part that is SPECULATION, again, because I haven't seen either an explanation or actual language (which should have been part of H3800). That means that most foundation budgets will be higher than both House 1 and the passed House budget, but not as high as they would have been with the Senate budget. As for state aid, the majority of districts were seeing their increase through the $30/pupil, so that doesn't change ('though do recall that the Governor's budget had set that at $20/pupil, so our foundation budget charts are not yet updated). And if anyone finds or has the actual language, please let me know; I'd be interested.

This means, of course, that two years on from the Foundation Budget Review Commission, with districts across the state repeating that we need finance reform, the only change we saw was the fragmentary one in health insurance. This isn't how one truly values public education.

Oh, and Senator Chang-Diaz was one of two votes against it.

The Department's budget is just over $14M, and continues to contain a boatload of earmarks, which I won't go into here, 'though at some point I have a whole rant on that.

METCO is $20.5M, splitting the difference between House and Senate.

Regional transportation reimbursement is $61.5M (which had been as high as $62M, so it also splits the difference).

The circuit breaker, something specified by Senator Karen Spilka as a "painful" cut, passed at $281,231,181, lower than BOTH House and Senate. Note, however, that it is $50,000 lower than what the Senate passed, which, in a budget of this size (and an account of this size) makes that more of a symbolic cut than anything.

Likewise, McKinney-Vento reimbursement was cut from both houses, being passed at just over $80M; this is an account which has never been fully funded.

Note that all of these previous three are reimbursements, meaning the district fronts the money and gets the money back from the state afterwards. There is here, then, less of a hit on the starting end, but we'll see budgets straining on by midyear.

Targeted intervention in underperforming schools passed at $7.2M, which is lower than either house had passed.

The MCAS line passed at $26.9M, also lower than either budget previously passed.

Extended learning time passed at $13.9M, lower than either.

Innovation schools split the different with a budget of $165,000; that's $150,000 with $15,000 earmarked for Pentucket Regional.

There had been no difference in the amount set aside for charter school reimbursement--an acknowledged-as-underfunded $80.5M--so that passed as previous.

Those are most of the major lines. As always, if you have questions, please let me know.

Senate Ways and Means budget

The Senate Ways and Means Committee released their FY18 budget today. You can find the executive summary here, along with the ability to download the rest of the budget.

A few foundation budget notes first: in the outside section, the FBRC implementation committee (for lack of a better term) is set up:

Section 5B½. (a) Annually, not later than January 15, the secretary of administration and finance shall meet with the senate and house committees on ways and means to jointly determine an implementation schedule to fulfill the recommendations filed on November 2, 2015 by the foundation budget review commission established in section 4 of chapter 70. The implementation schedule shall establish a foundation budget as defined in section 2 of said chapter 70 incorporating the categories of tuitioned-out special education rate, assumed in-school special education enrollment, low-income increment, low-income enrollment, foundation benefits, retired employee health insurance and English language learner increment; provided, however, that in the first year of the term of office of a governor who has not served in the preceding year, the parties shall determine an implementation schedule not later than January 31 of that year. In determining the implementation schedule, the secretary of administration and finance and the senate and house committees on ways and means shall hold a public hearing and receive testimony from the commissioner of elementary and secondary education and other interested parties. The schedule may be amended by agreement of the senate and house committees on ways and means in any fiscal year to reflect changes in enrollment, inflation, student populations or other factors that may affect the remaining costs in the schedule. The implementation schedule may be included in a joint resolution and placed before the members of the general court for their consideration along with proposed legislation to execute and implement the schedule. The implementation schedule shall be subject to appropriation.

That's important, because that's the part that really makes it happen. If they have to get together and publicly decide every year "here's where we are; here's where we're going," then this becomes something that we're all in on making happen.

Luc Schuster on poverty in education in Massachusetts: MASS/MASC

Schuster:
Poverty in MA runs along the same trendline as the U.S., but at a lower level
poverty has gone done a little in the past few years, but we're still above pre-recession levels
same trend is true of children in poverty
productivity continues to rise, but wages have not kept pace with productivity
up to WWII, the two tracked almost directly: benefit shared with all types of workers
benefits flatlined after WWII: productivity continues to rise, but workers did not see the benefit
reference to his article in Commonwealth on what wages would be in Gateway Cities if they had tracked with incomes rising together

MassBudget discussion on the Foundation Budget Review Commission

Opening with this quote from Horace Mann:

Having no other mines to work, Massachusetts has mined into the human intellect; and, from its limitless resources, she has won more sustaining and enduring prosperity and happiness than if she had been founded on a stratification of silver and gold, reaching deeper down than geology has yet penetrated...From her earliest colonial history the policy of Massachusetts has been to develop the minds of all her people, and to imbue them with the principles of duty. To do this work most effectually, she has begun it with the young. If she would continue to mount higher and higher toward the summit of prosperity, she must continue the means by which her present elevation has been gained. In doing this, she will not only exercise the noblest prerogative of government, but will cooperate with the Almighty in one of his sublimest works.

Connection between level of taxation and economic strength: there is no correlation!
Interesting to look at education: better educated workforce is correlated with stronger economy. Virtually no outliers (Alaska and West Virginia are the two; if you have coal or oil, you're an exception)
"The way to have a stronger economy IS to have a better educated workforce"
35 years ago, the picture was different (look at Michigan auto plants, for example)
early education, access to health care, other supporting systems working
"important to strengthen our economy in twenty to thirty years"
"it's not going to take one thing, it's going to take these things working together"
covering early education, wraparound services, and extended learning time
early ed: students are going to be better set-up for success; for parents, have a standard place for kids to go, where they'll be safe and well-cared for
kids will have higher rates of employment
programs need to have small class sizes, developmentally appropriate curriculum, appropriate facilities
about a third of low income kids in MA lack publicly supported pre-K
(and more kids who don't have public support above that threshhold)
quality pre-K cost exceeds EEC subsidies and foundation budget
"getting to the quality that we need" means getting from (to use NJ) from $5K to $1 3K
in some schools, 50-60-70% (or higher) kids coming from low income background
set of programs doing something about it, integrated with schools, sometimes co-located with schools
health service clinics, mental health services, prevention, wellness, family resource centers
"not effective to ask the same people to do more work"
"not just in moving social indicators but also the academics"
$1300 in cost per student (total statewide cost of $468M)
increased learning time
highest income families are spending $9800 per year per kid on enrichment out of school
"this is where policy can come in and level the playing field"
"you have to not just do more of the same"
"great opportunity for, not just for kids to get extra support, for teachers to work together"
improved academics combined with engaging enrichment
also working with wraparound services
citing $1600 for ELT, summer, after-school ($575M)
higher ed: for tuition free community colleges and state universities
net cost of $325M

what are the most important things we could do?
I'll give names if I know them; apologies otherwise
someone from early childhood: if the focus on what happens at zero-three a little more strongly, but in a way that also engages parents as partners
build skills that make them more successful at this level
kids learn early, pretty significant savings down the road
member of the Hingham School Committee: education funded by the local towns (Hingham is a minimum aid community); schools don't necessarily get that money
important for towns to understand that
Norma Shapiro: local level important to understand that much of the research that has been done has been done in urban areas
"the place that it really makes a difference is in the urban communities"
"majority of the students that living in Massachusetts live in those urban communities"
successful economy, success of children in urban communities are tied together
particularly important for state to support urban schools
former Rep. Alice Wolfe: how can you actually disseminate the information adequately to the towns and throughout the state
"before we have a ballot question...we have to have the messenging done really well"
so the decisions are really made wisely
otherwise opportunity will be wasted
UMass: someone who would say you should do this tomorrow
fear you may have oversold the advantages of education
median wages (and economic inequality)
if you correct graph for cost of living, suspect graph might not be so steep in gains
connection seems important in figuring that out
"education often presented as a panacea...it's not"
"a lot of other things outside of education are important as well"
MassBudget: inequitities are because our top earners do better, not that our low income people do worse
prof at Northeastern Law (MassBudget board): resisted urge to add up numbers and add another $1B to take care of the low-hanging fruit first
which produces the greatest benefit per buck?
MassBudget: not a scientific answer

One option for generating revenue for generating this thing
state collecting a smaller share of economic outlook today than in the early 90's
largely due to changes in the personal income tax
"cost around $3B a year in lost revenue"
income tax rate, dividends & interest, personal exemptions
weak wage growth, and a lot of the growth that has happened has gone to top 1%
"not the way the economy has to function, not the way the economy has always functioned"
how does that effect revenue?
"sometimes termed an 'upside down structure'"
the bottom 99% pays a higher share of taxes: 9.4%
top 1% 6.5%
most of that is the sales tax
$2B lost from top level is gap discussed
proposed constitutional amendment to additional 4% rate to any income over $1M
raise about $1.7B in new annaul income dedicated to education and transportation
makes system more fair (though there would be a 1.4% gap remaining)
rate only applies to any dollar over $1M
federal government will reimburse about 1/3 of that (as funds paid to state are deduced from federal income)
most states tax higher rates of income at higher levels
Massachusetts would be in line with NY, VT, DC, NJ if it passed

Chelsea superintendent: gap is huge, need is huge
"our needs are great and the money is not there"
"where does this intersect with the foundation budget review commission...it seems like the the report was the tree falling the forest: it's big and nobody heard it"
now getting review of FBRC said, which I'm skipping notes on

and yes, then I kicked the question of "what about this year?" up, with a suggestion that a negative inflation year, if budgeted as a regular inflation year, gave the state potential room to make progress on something (I suggested inflation); they also should at least discuss how to make low income work
Noah Berger from MassBudget agreed that the inflation suggestion was a possibility


something of a piecemeal review of history of the foundation budget
FairShare amendment is three years away: "I don't think we can wait...I think we need to be thinking of strategies to move this forward" sooner
Hingham rep: "the answer was 'we don't have any money'"
"if we can get the leadership together to agree to get together and agree to start chipping away at issues...to start building on it and tackling it"

Tom Scott, MASS Executive Director:
special ed and health insurance are funds that we are required to fund
have to pull money away from other programs: "limited number of places for school committees to go"
"expression coming of 'how long can this path continue?'"
"we talk about Chelsea and our large urban districts...we have a lot of suburban communities that have an urban experience"
social-emotional development number one need for communities
Chelsea "where is the moral imperative?"
MassBudget: don't look at us, we're a research organization

MassBudget interesting first step on foundation budget on inflation factor, as it is a negative factor this year:
"that could create an opportunity...does open up some space...there is that extra room"

Barbara Madeloni: change the conversation
begin to talk about the kind of schools our kids need
social-emotional needs of our kids
begin to make income inequality a critical issue in public education
"need to be deeply democratic conversations at the school committee level"
experience of people in their daily lives, and how does that impact the experience of young people in the classroom
giving us some aspirational goals for this
"There's a lot of powerful people at this table, and we have the power to do this."

Shea (from Senator Chang-Diaz's office): how are we going to pay for it? but not in FY17 in the FairShare amendment
concerned about losing momentuum
Senate increased earned income tax credit; took away a tax credit that no one had ever heard of
"there are other ways to do this in the short term"
"needs to start thinking of incremental ways that we can move the dial"

Boston Children's Hospital
changing tide of divestment in our kids to help them really be successful

one place that we as a community may want to be looking for resources
$1B in state tax benefit for business investment: research that shows that they're at best marginally successful
early childhood much more successful

Dave Verdolino, MASBO: if we're trying to convince taxpayers in this state that more resources...early childhood, you leverage that investment for the next twelve years
that's the impetius for having people get behind why we need to spend more money
"that's a universal thing"

Norma Shapiro: how do we convince people on this? fewer and fewer households without children
many more people who have no connection to the school system
MassBudget: people have the sense that why Massachusetts is a good place to live is the education system
making that point that investment now in education is going to shape the economy

Holyoke update

Receiver Zrike updating on Holyoke (which doesn't have a backup)
Sagan points out that they don't have results yet (yeah, about that...remind me to talk about Holyoke's MCAS scores)
Zrike: goals of the plan

• build on what is working and fix what is not
• empower staff and hold them accountable
• extend time for learning
• establish pathways to career and/or college success (clear rework of secondary)
• invest in partners strategically ("and all kinds of partners: charter partners, private partners")
• repair relationships with families ("they'd walk if they could")

special education review process scheduled to begin

comprehensive strategies to address needs of ELLs: "how you can best use the first language to develop the second language"

structures around instruction of the plan: redesign secondary educational experiences: grades 6-12

"it's gotta be more than saying we have two high schools"

need multiple pathways, beyond two

climate and culture: pilot director of culture and climate (licensed social worker)

teachers feel as though they have nowhere to go beyond special ed, not all kids have special ed needs

"looking at outside partners with track records"

"create an activist parent and family engagement office"

developing leadership in the district: "just rolled out a new ed eval" model

thought previous eval "was a compliance document"

organziation "all about feedback"

"just because you get feedback doesn't mean you're going to fired"

need to hang onto people he has "need work to do to build those systems" of new leadership

see a lot of people who aren't engaging with kids, then see classes sizes of 30

"particularly as we're spending more than most urban districts" on administration

has a "chief of implementation"

alternative programs for overage and under credited
schools fully engaged in operational schedules to use time

Stewart: when is budget approved in Holyoke?
began this winter into spring
"that seems late in terms of recruting and some of what you're talking about"
"not holding back on the budget" in recruiting
Stewart: how families are being integrated into the work? Particularly at Dean and Morgan
Zrike: doing a lot of meetings in housing development
had visits to homes
"we're going to come to your home or your neighborhood"
Morgan school "really have flipped" "because of some of the relationship wth families"
"that's the beginning of the relationship"

Doherty: has been built on other successful turnaround plans
"can you cite two or three significant differences between the Holyoke" plan and Lawrence?
Zrike: secondary redesign
some of the work around family engagement "given what I've heard about the context in Holyoke very early on"
"didn't want to be solely influenced" by a single model

Willyard "have done a fantastic job in the district"
Have seen benefits of breakfast in the classroom
don't think experience around arts is as strong as it should be
"have places of it, it's not consistent enough"
"look at what those look like" especially outside of secondary
built into extended school day

Foundation Budget Review Commission is BACK

After a summer hiatus, the Foundation Budget Review Commission is meeting today at the State House at 9:30 in hearing room A1 (which is in the basement, if memory serves). I'm heading in on the train to take notes.
As the initial report took up out-of-district special ed (though not to the degree necessary) and health insurance, they'll be looking at what's left at this point. The list they've put together is:

• in-district special education 
• low income increment
• ELL increment
• mental health/ wraparound services
• Professional development/common planning time/instructional coaches
• extended learning time
• technology
• full day preschool
• K-3 pupil-teacher ratios
• operations and maintenance
• inflation adjustment

They're also going to be looking at their effective use and efficiencies charge, and they've floated several items on tying expenditures to particular uses. 

Notes to come!



In

-

District SPED cost rate



Low

-

income increment



ELL increment



Mental Health/Wraparound ser

vices



PD/Common Planning Time/Instructional coaches



Extended learning time



Technology



Full Day Preschool



K

-

3 pupil:teacher ratios



Operations & maintenance



Inflation adjustment



In

-

District SPED cost rate



Low

-

income increment



ELL increment



Mental Health/Wraparound ser

vices



PD/Common Planning Time/Instructional coaches



Extended learning time



Technology



Full Day Preschool



K

-

3 pupil:teacher ratios



Operations & maintenance



Inflation adjustment



In

-

District SPED cost rate



Low

-

income increment



ELL increment



Mental Health/Wraparound ser

vices



PD/Common Planning Time/Instructional coaches



Extended learning time



Technology



Full Day Preschool



K

-

3 pupil:teacher ratios



Operations & maintenance



Inflation adjustment



In

-

District SPED cost rate



Low

-

income increment



ELL increment



Mental Health/Wraparound ser

vices



PD/Common Planning Time/Instructional coaches



Extended learning time



Technology



Full Day Preschool



K

-

3 pupil:teacher ratios



Operations & maintenance



Inflation adjustment

Liveblogging the Foundation Budget Review Commission

live from a well-refrigerated fourth floor room at the State House (which still doesn't have wifi)
posting as we go 

UPDATE: Because it becomes relevant, a partial cast list: Pat Francomano is Mass School Committees president; Dave Verdolino is MASBO (finance people)'s Executive Director; Barbara Madeloni is the Mass Teachers' Association (union) president; Melissa King does some finance things for DESE;Tom Moreau is there for the Secretary of Ed; and Ed Moscovitch wrote the foundation formula originally.

in approval of minutes, Q from Francomano: preliminary report was going to lay out remainder of things that will be discussed beyond sped and health insurance; not reflected in the minutes
motion to add consensus report will innumerate "all of concerns"
Chang-Diaz: recollection not crystal about this, recall discussing it in the workplan
thought preliminary versions of findings included?
Francomano: that they would be listed, "that it was essential that these be dealt with as well"
Peisch: told that third paragraph on second page, essentially verbatium from that
by notes he's right; the suggestion was made by Sen. Jehlen
Jehlen: we all understand that it's going to be the case; would that be sufficient in your view
Francomano: I don't want to have a preliminary report be issued with other items that are equally valid
Peisch: I don't think there's great disagreement about what needs to be addressed over this month
varying recollection of what was produced
minutes are not a transcript, a reflection of actions taken
Francomano: would not have voted for compromise item if it did not include other items
MBAE member expects other items
EEC: today's conversation will be included in preliminary report in some way, "captured" in some way
"I think whether it's reflected in the minutes are not" that's consensus
Chang-Diaz; include in minutes for THIS minute that catagories that will continue to deliberate on over the session in preliminary report
Francomano agrees
minutes approved

review and discuss feedback on health care and special ed
vote was "subject to input from advisory members"
comments have been submitted and distributed
chairs have reviewed comments and have in packet a proposal
under health care benefits: adjust health care to reflect average group insurance rate, separate health care cost adjuster
Peisch: in reviewing comments from advisory group, this is the proposal that reflected the majority of the comments that were received
Madeloni: recommend blended rate, not just GIC
some municipalities don't wish to shift costs to employees
acknowledge that not everyone is using the same rate
MBAE: into details of what the average is and what the average means
not clear it's being driven by actual cost, actual numbers
have to consider that
"it is not clear...what the average means here, is there some weighting, are retirees in there...what average means versus what other factors are included"
whether or not we take into account a weighted average versus the cost of all plans or as Mass Taxpayers suggested the highest enrollment plan
a little more understanding what just what we mean by average
Melissa King (DESE): average employer share of the premium
"to do any refinement of that primarily relies on getting good data"
MASBO: might be helpful to know, back in '93, what was the basis of this rate
"I have trouble trying to blend something with other providers who may come and go"
assuming that GIC being used because many are in GIC
anything from how number was derived then? (this to creator of formula)
met with five superintendents, who shared their information
at the time thought of having several inflation rates
why are we looking for a different rate? You want something that goes up at whatever rate the cost of health care goes up
Is our purpose to fund whatever health costs are occurring or a reasonable rate?
Edward Moscovitch: Don't just want to fund what everyone is spending
"I was thinking last night about the politics; it isn't so much what we're going to vote on but what's going to pass the Legislature"
important to understand what made the conservative Governor to fund a $2B increase in education
business community pushed for proposal: "It was the business community's proposal"
the other thing that gave it legs was a number of other things having to do with schools: charter schools, testing increase
"they believed that built into this were things that were going to change schools"
"if we don't include those sorts of things it this, I don't think we're going to be successful"
regional schools: have to find a benchmark people can live with
"I think there have been a number of legsilative" measures with GIC
think retiree part is excellent
also some cost of living
"we're never going to come to a perfect solution"
brings $684M to the table to begin to address some of the areas we've all heard about
another: think average will be nailed down (later)
send a bad message (if use something other than GIC)
"presumably that money has gone back to schools in varying fashions"
Chang-Diaz: Q on costs of insurance (family/individual)
Madeloni (MTA); most of our districts are not in GIC; even if we could look at BC/BS, get a more realistic view of the costs
Peisch: some may not be part of GIC but costs are in same general rates
"I think it's a reasonable benchmarks"
motion to amend using Mass Taxpayers recommendation of average of GIC rate
"rate has to be multiplied by something"
"most widely used GIC program weighed according to the way it's actually used in family and individuals"
MASBO: "I don't disagree with what Ed's saying, but isn't that farther down the line?"
"in two lines, there's a lot of work to do of what's captured in that sentence"
I'm making the assumption that they're going to look at split at family/individual and range of copays
"if we were to try to capture all of that in here, we wouldn't get anything else done today"
Peisch: thinks number is embedded in calcuation
King: it's the statutory staff (not actual employees)
Peisch recommends that people think about the time
Tom Moreau: you're picking up the average, you're picking up the commonality of usage
of reforming health care: "like this, these things don't come down from Sinai"
Peisch asks if there are any further comments
motion seconded by Francomano
Madeloni: using MassBudget, this proposal will leave a gap in funding
MBAE: does this give leverage to municipalities to have 'is this a good conversation to have or not'
"it certainly is directionally covering part of the gap"
regionals point out that the conversation has to happen every year, anyway,as they need to show gap between most common and plan used by district
Chang-Diaz: don't know that we can get there today
"worry a little bit about volitility"
Reville: incumbent upon us as we set benchmarks to create "maximum efficiencies" at the local level
aka: districts may spend more, that doesn't mean it's right
Reville: review of history of standards applying to everyone, some periodic measures of accountability
Peisch: any comment on other two components as related to health care
now onto retiree health insurance
One way or the other, it has to be in for everyone or other for everyone
MASBO: had it be included in 93, wouldn't have the gap we have now
could be most significant part of proposal
Mass Taxpayers wants to include retirees health insurance in NSS
argument is that there's no formula that would captured it
assume that towns actual costs would be included, can't come up with any way to do it
Peisch: recommendations are intended to be general for those who will actually draft legislation
"how municipalities deal with unfunded liabilities they have in the past is not part of this"
MBAE: some capture of inflation has to be in here, some thing that has to be in here is frequency (of taking this measure)
actual drafting of report should include; montior for volitility
like Mass Taxpayers' argument on leaving it out; how it can be part of mandated spending
Peisch: draft report will be circulated for comment
Moreau: concern about crowding out happens currently, as it isn't included in all but is included in that
"expenditures towards that are being counted as expenditures towards education"
"has been a thorny, troubling problem that no one has been able to resolve"
regionals: remember that if we take it out, communities will pick it up as an additional assessment
those towns it does impact will not be supportive
consensus to move forward on using "most common" versus "average"
Reville asks what the difference is; Peisch "we don't know" as the calculation hasn't been done
staying with average, rather than most common

Peisch: special education
moves it up to the level of what actually is
16% receiving special education services 25% of the time
Jehlen: I know that it's about 17% receiving services; I don't know that it's 25%
Peisch: number was put forward by superintendent
Jehlen: is number based on what's typical, what's average?
MASS: based on "what's typical"
Francomano: have heard that this number has varied
does MASS argue that this is a realistic representation of what currently exists?
MASBO: we've not done the math to quantify
I don't know if data was available to support 25%
"some districts are going to overrun 25% on average"
"I think for the purposes of what we're doing here you have to have a benchmark"
"I don't think that has come from the administrative group; I know it didn't come from MASBO"
Francomano: if it's merely better than what we have, that's not a benchmark for what we should be striking for
DESE: state average for sped is 17% head count
MASS: don't collect under federal
"it's a benchmark to start from"
Francomano(MASC): don't want to start from, concerned about grabbing something while we can
Moreau: there was a time when we had better information
information we need
"you want to base it on practice rather than what we've been doing"
Francomano: want to be sure we all know that and include that in the report
reminder that the assumption was low
if the assumption was low or if the costs were low
running through what the assumptions of the costs were when foundation budget was constructed
Ferguson: year to year it looks different
different program may have different models
"we're not going to be able to do it" (in getting a standard)
"you could have a great program for autistic program in one district that isn't replicable in other districts"
"what you look at staffing and things, it's a whole other ballgame...we aren't going to investigate it without" much more work
Jehlen: recommend that it is an inadequate measure and should be revisited in three years
"I believe that 25% is too low...know a lot of kids that have one on one and I don't want those kids outsourced"
this assumption should be revisited after three years of data collection of actual amount of time students are being served
Madeloni: is the rate adequate accurate?
MASBO: really have to get one of them right, recognizing where only one of them lies
"I think there should be something aspirational to this rate"
in other words, he's arguing that the state should be pressuring districts to drive this cost center down
"there's two components to sped: an in-district component and an out-of-district" component
MBAE: modest movement in the direction of actual costs
'there is a difference with special ed" versus health care
Peisch: out of district cost to eliminate gap between
some back and forth about mathematics of how it works
MassBudget: still has a comment on in district
in-district may have a problem "and we just don't know yet"
set current staffing against previous assumption
"I hope moving forward there's room" to discuss
"I didn't hear an amendment to the language that's being adopted"
Peisch: no, there wasn't
MassBudget: so statement of the problem isn't what's being dealt with right now

and everything else. They have a list. I haven't seen it.
Peisch: proposal preschool adjusted from half day to full day for those who provide full day
particularly for those who can most need full day
Chang-Diaz: mention of early ed has been woven in
demonstrated best practices
Edward Moscovitch concern that preschool could be expensive
"you could have every district in the state do it!"
if every district does half day does full day
"are you saying that every district could have as much preschool as it wants?"
Melissa King: don't think you'll see a rush, but a slow take-off
Moscovitch: full day K is more important
Peisch: percentage of fullday K is very high
Chester: up over 90% for full day K
Moreau: delivery system, bringing up to speed, it's a robust conversation
think it's an item to get discussed over summer to November
Madeloni: important that we don't do this just piecemeal
question about what works and what we want our young people to be experiencing
Reville: don't think a lot of districts do it, don't have space
not worried about a stampede
Peisch: straw poll on preschool in for June versus putting it off
most want to put it off
Chang-Diaz: wish to say something about early education even without a high level of detail
if we are putting it off, are we signing ourselves up for a more complex consideration
Francomano: think could develop a bulleted point, this is a priority for us, yes it needs to be looked at comprehensively
Moscovitch: thought always seems to be that you can do so much for these kids in preschool, neglect K, 1,2
Reville: so late in dealing with low income factors, seems to me that this is one
some inclusion in June report, more detail to come in November report

Peisch: to go into some accountability measure that we might be able to include in the report
based on something from superintendents proposed and others
also run through list of other items to be included
Moreau: to look at data in three years, either as part of discussion or otherwise
staffing and budgeting information from districts
Peisch: discussion in late June meeting for district data collection
Verdolino: because of information of special ed, to have some wording to put up front
"remains unaddressed by the really good comments that make up the report to this point"
Chang-Diaz: how much of this is knowable at this point?
Could we over the summer get really numbers
Moscovitch: asks teachers and superintendents to nominate ten schools that are 'good' and ten that "aren't"
look at actual special education spending
"we heard some testimony about school buildings in terrible condition...I'm curious if they're spending what the foundation budget calls for in custodians"
actual numbers on if those numbers are about right or not about right
Moscovitch: including instructional coaches
MASS suggests including PD as part of language
suggestion that mental health and wraparound services be separated
what if a strong mayor cuts the school budget: could ten taxpayer suit be brought?
Peisch: three or four more meetings ;can't put everything in
five more catagories, have added two more
Chester: real concern about low income or ELL: have a real concern if those increments really benefit the kids that they're intended for
concern about small district
"staying solvent by stripping away offering for kids and incentives for teachers"
incentives offered efficiencies for scale
Jehlen: would make low income separate from extended learning time
Chang-Diaz: slash marks mine
extended learning time presented as one way of helping low income students
not saying that the thing on one side of the slash is the solution for the other side of the slash
Moreau: discuss what we have, what we do
MBAE: if discussion is going to be about increment, also tracking of it
adjustment about technology: "don't envision how we come up with a number"
Moreau: will low income include a discussion of how the students are counted?
Peisch: yes, since change in technical count is problematic due to federal government change
Chang-Diaz: would hope that technical discussion of how we count does not need to be more than ten minutes, technical discussion of how we count them is more broad
Francomano: need to look at western part of state
they have particular issues delivering services, as they are scattered about
(not that they don't want to work together; there's so much space!)
Verdolino: no one wants to take anything off, would it be helpful to prioritize for discussion?
Peisch agrees
Jehlen: how we're going to make decisions about what these numbers are going to be
"who is going to do this work?"
took all the categories they had and made an expert judgment in 1993
either we can take what exists and update it
or we can take what an adequate education is, which is our charge
"there are studies that we can look it, but I would settle for expert judgment on what we should do in each of these categories"
Francomano: part of it is methodology, but it's beyond methodology, it's validating the assumptions
MASS: similar to previous, recommendations on all these particular areas
Moscovitch: would suggest that numbers of special ed
"I think there's a sense that because the health care is too low that everything is too low"
"is eight to one reasonable?"
"you'd have a better idea of what's underfunded if you see the staffing levels"
Peisch comments that they think they've seen that
Schuster: think that would really interesting
having trouble picturing the four to six topics on the agenda
could think through, for example, eight to one, and why there's still a really big gap
similar discussion on low income and what those supports and staffing look like
Chang-Diaz: one version of what this could look like is the work plan is the superintendents' working group
do work, put that out to group and respond, then August compilation going on
September group reviewing collated responses
maybe categories of districts to be part of the working groups
could also focus on studies, without casting out, working groups
Peisch: seems to me that we've exhausted what we can get out of these topics
back with recommendations about how we will analyze the topics
Chang-Diaz: remainder in bullets? or some paragraph
Peisch: put together some language for rest of group by next meeting

accountability for how funding is spent
in order to access additional funds, districts would have to submit a plan on how those funds would be spent
areas (UPDATED with full list): low income, ELL, professional development, ELT, instructional coaches, common planning, "hiring staff at levels that support student improvement," technology and instructional materials, wrap-around services,
recommend some plan on how those areas would be addressed be submitted
Francomano: have a problem with the concept
foundation budget has been underfunded, but comment is that somehow districts have been mismanaging their funds
"I've had to cut things in order to meet my obligations in special ed and health care"
"you're increasing the foundation budget...but it's just reflecting my actual spending"
"maybe I want to restore art or music...maybe I want to deal with overcrowded classrooms"
there has been nothing to indicate that districts have been mismanaging funds
MBAE: state and local contribution
original grand bargain, results, whatever those results are giving
fix to the foundation budget: is acknowledging gap
"it's just the reality"
perhaps regionalization, perhaps getting dollars to follow the student
Reville: how will it go to a cause that it's been targeted for
"I don't think the main feature is second-guessing locals"
MASS: don't see this as strings, as ties
Verdolino: don't see an option in one or two that we're going to spend special education and health insurance
"tell me from what we've heard in the public hearings...where else would you spend it on?"
MMA: there are so many needs on local level
"there are things that we've cut, things that we've gone without to take care of the most basic needs"
"to be handcuffed to a specific list of the needs and the responsibilities does a disservice to the 6000 students I'm responsible for"
Peisch: to clarify: asking districts to submit a plan
there may be districts were any number of these particular items are not being funded
I don't anticipate
Francomano: but if it's not in numbers 1-8, I can't spend it
but if I want to add money for a music teacher
argument that you can add staff "to improve student performance"
DESE is going to tell me that a music teacher doesn't do it
"the way that we measure student improvement these days is MCAS or PARCC; music isn't included"
Peisch trying to get to general agreement on some accountability measure of some kind
Jehlen: this commission is supposed to say what's adequate
we are supposed to be fulfilling the grand bargain "and we haven't"
many more measures than there were in 1993
there's the wrong message in putting these limits
"to say that Boston can't spend money to put in water fountains...I don't think that's our intention"
districts at foundation are spending less than they're supposed to on class size and teachers
"it's insulting"
If it's submitting school improvement plans, that's fine.
"I think that's moving away from something...we should not both be controlling the outputs and the incomes"
Moreau: reminded of Reville's phrase: loose and tight concept
McDuffy: constitutional obligation does fall on state and local
Moscovitch: this money isn't going to happen without people voting for it
senior legislators won't vote for it without some assurance it will go to
my thought was a broad area that most likely effects the way teachers teach
can't only spend money, you have to report on it
Madeloni: I think this is a huge decision and a major change in thinking
needs a lot more thinking
in a particular social-political context: micromanagement is the wave of the day
a shift to this kind of accountability is dangerous
"I like a lot of things on this list...but what's not on this list...I can't even tell you, because I'm not going to be able to tell you until I'm putting my budget together"
(sorry, didn't catch who this was)
we need to also justify our budgets: for us to simply ask where is this money going
reconvene on June 23

Liveblogging: Foundation Budget Review Commission meeting

Posting from the Mass Bar Association, 16 Beacon Street. It looks as though the Commission is having a presentation from MassBudget today. Members of the Commission as originally constructed here; note that the Governor has turned over and that some send designees. 
Updating as we go.

Peisch: very very few rooms of this size at the State House (and all were booked)
reminder that meeting is being recorded
two presentations today on 'what works' when looking at effective and efficient policies
Rennie Center and MassBudget:
"a whirlwind tour of what works in education"
this is a surface level: "What we want to do is be useful to you all"
20th anniversary of Ed Reform on 1993
create a comprehensive vision of education: tried to say what does our entire educational system need
largely focused on schooling: K-12 education
"we now define education quite differently; we talk about what happens in school, but also what happens outside of school"
many of the reforms we're looking at take place outside the traditional school day
state expanding how it supports education: early education, innovation schools, educator evaluation
"state is grappling with an expanded definition of education"
early childhood education: large proportions of students not scoring proficient/advanced in third grade testing
serving less than 2/3rds of low income children who would benefit from high quality education
expanding access and improving quality
strong short and long term benefits: for kids, for parents, for economy (parents working, then kids going on to do better)
for all 3 and 4 year olds in MA under 200% of poverty:

I've got a photo of the chart to put in here:

other models: NJ has done a hybrid expansion of preschool (Abbott districts)
state fully funds full-day pre-kindergarden: funding goes to districts, which either does it or subcontracts it out
spend just under $13,000 a student
statewide average for K-12 in MA is $14,547
NIEER quality estimate for a full year, 9 hour day: $13,900
currently 1/2 day low income: $5,297 (base rate plus low income increment)
Q: implication that you need full day not half day? Any data that full day is neessary?
Schuster: providing information; helps family to have full day, not necessary role of school to provide that
Q: have we tracked comparable students as they go on?
response: childcare as well as education
we've now clarified the question!
yes, students who are in preschool (versus not) do benefit; there is data, 'though not the statewide evaulation of preschool (as there is no single statewide model of preschool)
Q: inputs here are clear; the outputs...do you see anything that involves reducation of cost for special education
A: getting early prevents misclassification and gets in correct program early on
Schuster: a lot of the dollars are already being spent on early education; they're just being spent by parents, not the public
Early childhood Sec'ty: just starting to get some data on children now: "just a very small slice" of children in programs, though
Condition of children in
12% of kids absent 10% of days enrolled or more
10% or kids 16-24 are not in school or employed
9% of students transfer in or out of school in a year
children are bringing a complex set of issues into school: homelessness, poverty, mental health issues, etc
wraparound services: in school or around school

• health services clinics
• mental health services, prevention, wellness
• family resource centers (homelessness, parental unemployement, etc)
• school and district level coordination needed

need someone whose sole job it is to coordinate these services

"not asking teachers to be social workers"

need to be aligned with a strong academic program: stabilize food, shelter, health, then frees up kids to learn

increasing recognition that this matters: Tulsa (TACSI)

can't prescribe what programs are; responds to what needs of community are

achievement closed or significantly narrowed in fifth grade test scores

incredulity (from commission member): "if you can wipe out the gap in one year, then why do you need preschool?"
'cause maybe something other than test scores matter?!?
took significant work to get there
Reville: is it simply enough to optimize instruction in the school or does mitigating other issues have an impact?"
(and they do)
Chang-Diaz: not necessarily moving one kid over a year: snapshot
also "we're always happy to follow up"
whole school intervention versus schools that did not: no math gap and 75% elimination of reading test gap
Madeloni: what constituted a strong academic program? Had afterschool, had Head Start, "can't say what all of the interventions were"
can follow up
CityConnects model in Boston and Springfield run out of Boston College
"were found to have an impact on high school completion and rention", following a middle school intervention
operate in elementary, middle, high school
cost: $1312/students: health clinics, mental health, wellness, prevention, family resource centers, district and school level admin
suggestion from Early Ed Sec'ty that intervention could be in early ed and multiply impact
comment: read by grade three: have not mentioned anything about after kindergarten; suggestions that there's all kinds of tradeoffs
"what does each one cost, which does each one contribute?"
A: what are the core resources of this work? "provide resources to provide non-academic resources"
Reville: a fallacy that any of these are an inoculation
support provided in a year but then withdrawn loses the effect
which ones have the longest lasting impact if we can't afford to do all
Chelesa super: have to be careful in looking for that magic bullet
"and it's at every age bracket that we need wraparound services"
Q: what does the $1312 include?
A: a mix and match of outcomes in the field (from Columbia Teachers' College in health clinics, KY family resources adjusted to MA dollars...)
but was not an effort to look at what dollars exist in the system and are currently being used in this way
Increased learning time: low income children not getting rich out of school learning that higher income peers are: $1450 to $9800 per family (comparing lowest 20% to highest 20% by family)
"need to do new things with that time...can't just do the same thing longer"
time is also for teachers to collaborate
improved academic engagement with enrichment
small group tutoring
also works well with wraparound services
Nearly all turnaround schools have done some sort of extended learning time, but it hasn't always worked the same
Orchard Garden: working with children with community partners, teachers twice amount of time to collaborate
supported MCAS score growth
"It shouldn't be thought of as three years and then it's done for life"
"the money is gone, but the kids are coming in with the same challenges"
Peisch asks if the drop off happened when fund went away
Reville: another case of providing services until improvement, then withdraw them 'and hope the growth continues'
for Orchard Gardens: $1651 (plus $1640 from Citizen Schools)
after school in LA $1747
summer learning $1440 for BELL summer program
High Schools:
multiple pathways to a diploma: flexible schedule, muliple ways to earn credit
more personalized learning, remediation, socio-emotional interventions, applied learning
increase completion rates
The Creamer center (hey, WPS!), Gateway to College at Massoit CC, Drury High Learning Lab, and I can't read the last one; inserting chart, which you probably won't be able to read, either. I'm going to see if I can dig it up:

per pupil costs estimates 2011-12 (not full costs)
"something that costs as high as what the Creamer costs to provide would not fit into the current per pupil expense model" I think I got that right
early college designs: early college credit in high school, but also early ID of academic needs and college counseling
looked at Amesbury High/Northern Essex CC; Winchendon High/Mt Wachusett CC; Marlboro High/mulitple partners
in some of these models, parents are funding; if not through grants, college, federal funding
creating flexibility to enable these strategies provides new opportunities
Q: raising age of requred attendance impact? No impact on graduation rate in states that have done it
athletics as an enrichment opporutnity

break

Presentation from the Revere Public Schools, Paul Dakin, Superintendent

80% poverty, when MCAS started was 7th from bottom, now all Level 1 and 2 schools
"part of the reason why are fiscal, but part is consistency with administration and consistency in policy with school committee"
have been superintendent for 14 years
"have embraced education reform"
"first from a foundational belief perspective"
philosophical: when we can agree to something, moral imperative goes on the table: "what is best for kids"
"has saved a lot of noise"
continuity and the successes we've had bring people back
"see in my head the vast degree of need...of children who are struck with poverty"
force of parents,
"some of prime elements of wraparound services are critical"
"with $7000 more, to people who believe that money doesn't matter, we could do it"
"part of this is economic"
look at income: "can work down costs and investigate the avenues you have"
not many ways to maximize income anymore
foundation budget, local contribution, not as many competitive grants as there used to be
work to pull kids back from private schools: "have enough choice in the district that you don't need to go elsewhere"
"it's a determined strategy and it's a real strategy"
parents won't think to send child without a rigorous system
philosophical belief that all kids can learn and work on that
how efficient we can be; most cost
agreement that if they took over transportation, they could keep any money that they saved
keep life skils students in district
adding programs for children with autism: "space is becoming an issue"
"can educate them in the community"
have children appreciate those academic and social differences
restructured administration: redesigned to put administrators working in curriculum working on the floor
adminstrators are "managing student life on the floor so order can prevail"
"guides in the school with teachers working with teachers so they have to collaborate"
"probably have five times the social workers that we had five years ago...that's not lower class size, but...kids can go to the classroom...and aren't wrestling with their own inabilities"
felt needed School Resource officers "students were running the asylum"
rubs off on the community in the sense that kids get a different sense of what an officer is like
building resiliancy; what baggage kids come in with
working to build not only in kids but also in teachers in dealing with it
cultural competency so as not to alienate parents and families
"bit the bullet in any sort of expansion we could" and put full day kindergarten in place
"there are penalties for success that we're experiencing"
becoming Level 1 and 2 takes DESC (?) money from us that allowed us to get there and now those moneies are taken away
expanded learning time in three schools
have an innovation school that tinkered with time a bit
...and each of them have worked.
struggle with TFA: teachers were great for the two years they had them, then they left; long term need for buy in with teachers who have the professional development
going to be crossing a path with income versus cost in ELT schools
teacher degrees go up; salaries go up; grant never goes up: has always told teachers never to count on ELT funding
getting to a point where the people who are already in the program can't provide the services
25% more time for 18% of the salaries for ELT; brought in Citizen Schools for expanded time so teachers could collaborate
"that's a predicament we're in and I think every ELT school is"
student-center learning environment with heavy doses of technology
"if we don't progress...we don't take that task in the next few years...I have students ready to have conversations on how to improve their work at the fifth grade"
Q: put your testimony in the lead with Worcester "there's some cause for optimism"
where are you with foundation? At (I checked; Revere is 7.6% over for FY15; they were last under in FY11)
with exemplary results as you have, and you spend at foundation, isn't that enough?
No, we're still missing children.
transient population is growing
immigrant population of older children who are nearly illiterate in their own language
"now have a line item in my budget for newcomers academy"
Q: you're still underspending foundation budget on instructional categories
money is going to health insurance instead
"That's one of the things I can't fix, though: YOU people can fix it!"
"That has to be in your recommendations not mine"
Super in Chelsea: "don't want commission to lose sight that Paul has been able to do that because of the ELT grant"
"what's the sustainable predicable funding streams for schools?"
Chang-Diaz: what are the numbers that you're hitting in Revere?
95% or so making it through MCAS on their first taking it in tenth grade; kids who don't make it first time in many cases were not in Revere through most of school
programs for kids who have the goal of getting them to where they need to be
Foundation Budget isn't moving fast enough to keep up with student population
Q: is Revere a minimum aid community? No (because it's a foundation aid community)
Q: what is the relationship with the city? A: School Committee has been very proactive, city is very much in the equation; does not have a great tax base
"there is more than an urban education dilemma; it's an education dilemma"
Title I grants; that's millions of dollars
competitive grants: "there aren't any out there"
Q: what's appropriate to go out in grants versus go out in foundation budget?
A: more philosophical: districts best running with teachers and administrators going together
MCAS is one of the reasons Revere improved itself
"but I don't like holding people accountable without giving them the decision making powers"
put money into places where teachers have some decision making over the program
Q: sense of scale for grants: less than 5% of budget
Q: building philosophical together: some people came slow to the four R's
still soe nay-sayers here and there
early on it was not easy; just have to stay persistent
"it's a lot of work to change a culture of learning"
Chang-Diaz: is there a way to operationalize that?
A: "school committee is an essential role..if they're not there, it's not going to happen"
"if there's no noise from a school committee--if there's no day-to-day noise--if they're in the boat and on the team"
way getting lost with the metaphors...
"begins with the superintendent who is working with the school committee"
Schuster: what's a core program and what's outside the foundation budget
recognition of the add ons
"is that expanded program allotment adequate? ...and is the model we have the right model?"
on the difficulty in finding superintendents "the best don't want the hassle of the job"
"they were saying 'I don't need the aggrevation'"
"they don't want to accept the hassle...and I say 'the hassle' and not 'the challenges'"
Chelsea super: the animosity of the media and the public on the profession

Peisch: process moving forward
looking for a 2/3rd vote on recommendations that will move forward
That recommendation passes

members have been asked to share recommendations to move forward
common denominator: interest to address benefits and special education
if there is interest, a draft recommendation for next meeting
asking for all further recommendations by Friday, so all recommendations may be put together and discussed at next meeting
"reasonable to take on in the time we have left"
concern from MASC president Patrick Francomano: "continually skirted around some of the other major issues"
concerned that those issues will not be dealt with
"to me that is not necessarily representative of what we're supposed to be about"
Peisch: "I'm fairly hopeful that we will not spend an awful lot of time discussing" sped and health care at the next meeting
interest in addressing low income in some way, interest in addressing how dollars are most effectively and efficiently spent
Q from Francomano: have we rejected the idea that every element of the formula should be recalculated?
Peisch: I don't know that we have explicitly rejected that
Chang-Diaz: recall hearing some dialogue at first meeting
Q: will go systematically through the categories?
Peisch: had anticipated
Chang-Diaz: "we'd like to hear from you guys! I imagine that some of you are going to have more crisp and articulated proposals"...and some will be questions
Q: what happened to consultant?
RFP put out; no responses, then freeze put on spending
Q: hoping that every school and district could be laid out under foundation budget: how many nurses, how many counselors
Peisch has been very responsive, looking at spending at every district is a lot
Q: not the spending: what if every district could have what the foundation budget called for
Q: do we need to be done by June?
Peisch: could probably squeeze in another meeting before then; why don't we see where we are at the next meeting
Jehlen: would like to see what is being suggested so far

NEXT MEETING: May 5, 10 am, at the State House (room TBA)