EDUCATION FUNDING – HB1174 Paul Katovich, Jason Helms, Lauren Hubbard, Merrilie Gunnier ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF EDUCATION IN OLYMPIA Legislative Prioritization • Addressing the State of Washington’s inequitable and insufficient education funding is ‘paramount’ to providing a prosperous future for ourselves and those that will follow. Funding Education First has been on the docket every biennium since 2006, but has really gain traction after the Supreme Court’s McCleary decision, which essentially orders the Legislature to obey their Constitutional duty and have ample education funding in place by 2018. • Senate passed SB5445 – Education capital projects funding. This is the easy side of Ed – the capital projects that already have shovel-ready plans in place. The hard part is the operational side. That’s where HB1174 comes in. It essentially marries two separate issues into one bill: 1. Funding Education First 2. Lays out a stair-step approach to funding increases in a specific order • These spending priorities have been studied many times and are actually on the books as Law from previous legislative efforts. The most notable are 2261 and 2776 – from the 2009-10 biennium, which together lay out the plan for addressing education shortfalls within the public school system in the State of Washington. The fact that the budget doesn’t fully meet the funding requirement of these bills is the crux of the problem Education now faces. • The Washington State Constitution contains the Nation’s strongest language in support of education. The preamble of Article IX has been included in nearly every legislative hearing on education that I’ve read or watched on TVW. “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”
Transcript
EDUCATION FUNDING – HB1174
Paul Katovich, Jason Helms, Lauren Hubbard, Merrilie Gunnier
ADDRESSINGTHEISSUEOFEDUCATIONINOLYMPIA
Legislative Prioritization
• Addressing the State of Washington’s inequitable and insufficient education funding is ‘paramount’ to providing a prosperous future for ourselves and those that will follow. Funding Education First has been on the docket every biennium since 2006, but has really gain traction after the Supreme Court’s McCleary decision, which essentially orders the Legislature to obey their Constitutional duty and have ample education funding in place by 2018.
• Senate passed SB5445 – Education capital projects funding. This is the easy side of Ed – the capital projects that already have shovel-ready plans in place. The hard part is the operational side. That’s where HB1174 comes in.
It essentially marries two separate issues into one bill:
1. Funding Education First
2. Lays out a stair-step approach to funding increases in a specific order
• These spending priorities have been studied many times and are actually on the books as Law from previous legislative efforts. The most notable are 2261 and 2776 – from the 2009-10 biennium, which together lay out the plan for addressing education shortfalls within the public school system in the State of Washington. The fact that the budget doesn’t fully meet the funding requirement of these bills is the crux of the problem Education now faces.
• The Washington State Constitution contains the Nation’s strongest language in support of education. The preamble of Article IX has been included in nearly every legislative hearing on education that I’ve read or watched on TVW.
“It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”
• The McCleary decision defines ‘paramount’, ‘ample’, ‘all’, and ‘education’, making it crystal clear that this obligation is the first and highest responsibility of the Washington State legislature. To ignore this responsibility is to break the law.
Policy vs. Spending disconnect
• The budgetary challenge within the State of Washington mirrors what we’re seeing at a national level. (SLIDE – basic pie chart of Washington State budget). The effort to rein in spending in response to the Great Recession during the 2012 supplemental budget equated to roughly $10.5B over a 3-year period – 60% of which came from education. Cuts would have been deeper if not for Federal aid packages in 2009-10, rainy day funds, and fee increases. Funding, especially during economic downturns are not meeting the demands of our policies. Washington’s total state debt exceeds $83B ($12K/person). We’re carrying this staggering obligation despite the fact that 1/3 of the State revenues comes in the form of Federal Aid.
• It’s really a question of priorities, but who can they say “no” to? With 85% of the budget tied to health & welfare or education, another 5% for Corrections, and 6% for debt service, the checks they’ve already written are becoming too numerous to cash.
Various legislators point to form over substance when discussing ‘Fund Education First’, claiming as Ross Hunter (48th Dist - Medina) did on February 1st that FEF would be a “procedural nightmare that would add a month or more to the legislative session”.
Timm Ormsby (3rd Dist - Spokane) voiced similar concerns, stating it was “more important to do it right”, meanwhile spinning the discussion into a health & welfare vs. education debate.
House Majority Leader, Pat Sullivan (47th Dist - Covington) claimed Washington State had the best SAT scores in the Nation, a factoid backed up by the OSPI’s website, but this turns out to be a ‘fun-with-numbers’ statistic, as Washington falls in the middle of the pack amongst the 50 States overall. He redirected attention to the opportunity gap, stating “the (education) system is rigged against the poorest schools.” He didn’t want to pit education against welfare.
• None of these arguments however came with an alternative that leads to the Washington State Legislature taking care of their “Paramount” duty.
Cathy Dahlquist (31st – Enumclaw) called out her fellow House members for not getting the job done and rebutted their main argument to FEF (health & welfare
vs. school funding) with a story. She illustrated with a personal story that the best opportunity to provide services for the underprivileged like Katie and Tyler is through the school system. Health care, food services, wrap-around support from professionals they have contact with every day are all needed to guide them down a path out of poverty.
Chad Magendanz (5th – Issaquah) noted “we can’t prioritize everything”. He too rebutted the health & welfare vs. education argument by saying, “Fund Ed First does not mean Fund Ed Only”.
Drew MacEwen (35th – Union) said it clearly: “stop holding Education Funding hostage for political means.”
Politics of Education
• As political turf that liberals once held high ground on, education has now changed hands. Conservatives now carry the Education banner at the forefront even though both political parties most assuredly support the idea of a vibrant and productive education system.
• Conservatives view education as a means to solving two conundrums:
1. As President Obama so eloquently put it, “the best anti-poverty measure is a World Class Education”. This is the “teach a man to fish ...” theory that on the surface is very palatable. That’s why the President said it. Strengthening Washington State Public Schools leads to a stronger economy, which in turn leads to a more sustainable vision of the future. Steering ourselves away from fiscal cliffs, both here in Washington State and the Nation, will take increasingly higher productivity. That can only be accomplished through an increasingly skilled labor force. This is especially true in a nation such as ours, where the work-force continues to shrink as a percentage of the population.
2. In order to capture a dominant political stance within the State legislature, liberals must first be cast as fiscally irresponsible and incapable of producing a functioning budget. The political posturing goes both ways, with the minority party typically having an easier time casting stones. Cathy Dahlquist calling out Democrats is a perfect illustration of this, ‘you can’t blame us, we’re not in charge’ tactic.
• The Washington State Supreme Court lit the fuse again with the McCleary decision, just as the Doran decisions sparked Education funding reform in the 70’s and 80’s.
Taxation Strategy
• After a generation of policy-making, lawmakers have built a battery of programs that has drawn our State into unsustainable deficit spending. Their solution has been to increase taxes, but only on those programs that the voting base will approve of. Education has been the cornerstone of this taxation strategy.
• Local levy authority is their attempt at laying the responsibility of the State (to fund Education) back at the feet of the local taxpayer, shifting an ever-increasing amount of the burden back to local taxing districts. Gone are the days when the local levy was meant for new computers or a new gym. Now these local levies might fund as much as 30% or more of the total operating budget in some districts. (SLIDE – Levy Lid by school district).
Correct 30 years of budget attrition
• Currently 30% of school budgets are funded by local levies. Local levy dollars are meant to be used to pay for Basic Ed, but instead are supposed to pay for enhancements such as athletics and music programs. Many school districts across the state are strapped for money and instead putting all the money towards enhancements they are using less than 25% of the levy dollars to their use and instead spending them on basic education which is usually deemed more important. In 1975 we were in the same position where local levies provided 32% of school district revenues, but after a major decision in the Washington Supreme Court in 1976 said the use of local levies cannot reduce the states obligation to fund basic education (www.fundingwaschools.org).
• After that decision they passed the Levy Lid Act and funding by levies fell to less than 10%. Since then the State’s budget has grown dramatically, but unfortunately the funding of education has not followed the same trend as many more people and groups have their proverbial hand out to receive from the State. This has caused a sharp increase in using local levies to fund school districts and as the demand has increase for school dollars the levy lid has been increased to try and meet these needs.
Where Schools are making their cuts
• As funding has decreased by the State to school districts extracurricular activity programs have been the biggest loser and are the first to be cut. Many of these activities are needed to perform at optimum academic levels, help develop more well-rounded adults, and generally increase the high school experience.
• High school sports alone can provide teenagers an outlet, important for motor skill
development, teaches accountability and team work, and decreases depression while increasing energy. The alternative for cutting many of these programs is the “pay to play” to program which is essentially what it sounds like. If you want to participate you must come up with your own funds to enroll, but this only widens the opportunity gap with the “rich getting richer”.
Community Burden
• As we have discussed these Levy funds are continuing to be used to fund basic education, but this also affects the communities that need to pass these levies. Most school districts that need to pass levies are districts that are within areas that have lower property values. These regions are usually associated with poorer or lower income and to pass a levy they take on a greater tax burden to provide a better education for their children even further widening the gap. These additional taxes at the local level, if you take the State Constitution at face value, should be covered by the State.
History repeating itself
• History is constantly repeating itself and is no different in this subject. In 1977 the Doran decision issued a judgment finding that the State funding was insufficient to fund a basic program of education and the Legislature must define and fully fund a program of basic education through regular and dependable tax sources, and could not rely on local excess levies for that funding(Washington Association of Educators). This leads us to today and the McCleary decision where “The State Legislature is failing to fulfill its paramount constitutional duty”.
Where does Washington Rank in Funding
• Class Size-48th. (Washington Education Association)
• Student to teacher ratio-47th. (National Education Association)
• Teacher salaries-21st, but still well below national average. (Washington Education Association)
• Teacher salary growth-43rd, but is actually negative with a 1% decrease. (National Education Association)
• 25th in public school revenue per student. (National Education Association)
• School funding from combined state and local gov-43rd. (Washington Education Association)
• School funding coming from federal gov-22nd. (National Education Association)
Where do our students rank
• SAT scores-25th. (National Education Association)
• U.S. ranks 17th in combined scores out of the 40 Developed nations
• U.S. ranks 19th in school funding.
Unintended consequences
• Since funding the education budget first would be a drastic change for Washington state legislative procedures, the actual effects of 1174 cannot be exactly determined before implementation.
Jim Crawford a member of Chris Gregoire budget staff explained that passing the bill could lead to budget challenges in a budget climate that is running major deficits. As the earlier pie chart of the Washington state budget shows, the shortfall for monies including the cost of complying with McCleary and already guaranteed programs leaves a massive shortfall.
• If the bill was followed as it is intended it could tie the hands of law makers to the point of effectively bankrupting the state.
Possible outcomes of this scenario include even more fiscal dysfunction and an even more pressing need to raise revenues.
• No one can really predict how changing the budgeting structure will affect the legislative climate and time schedules.
Several lawmakers and policy analysts we talked to expressed concern that changing how budgets are addressed might have a steep learning curve causing a slowdown and bottleneck in legislation.
Nothing really changes
• On the flip side the unintended effects might be null because law makers would simply find a way around the new system. Changing the order of budget making may only lead to more political maneuvering and leveraging of education may be carried out in different ways.
Jim Crawford suggested that the new system might change the budgeting process only in the fact that the education budget would act as a symbolic shell and the majority of spending would be redirected to the omnibus budget.
State-wide levy redistribution
• Does the bill address levy monies and or replace the need for them? Does it prevent the unequal distribution of education monies?
If this bill could be executed without causing damage to the ability of the state to fund its obligations the bill would go a long way towards rectifying the inequities of the levy system. There would still be other advantages that richer school districts and counties would have over poorer rural counties. Education spending is not the only factor in student success.
Winners/Losers?
• Education benefits from an unquestioned fully funded status
The idea of fully funding education would have a positive impact especially because education funding has lagged disproportionately in certain districts. Teachers unions, school districts, parents and administrators are all enthusiastic about the state living up to its paramount duty
• Other programs may lose out
The question is where does the money come from to fulfill the State's obligations if raising revenue is not on the table?
Who are the players?
• Throughout our policy project process, we’ve applied our AgForestry skills as well as utilized our network to make contact with our local and state representatives. Through these interactions, we’ve gained an in depth understanding of our public policy project
and have gained an education in public policy. We’ve learned that our elected officials are only a click or a call away, all of us have been able to make contact with an elected official regarding our policy issue. These conversations have led us to a deeper understanding of the political system and have carried over into many of our conference calls and group discussions.
Political Implications
• The main objective of FEF is to fulfill our obligation to the children of WA State. McCleary passed recently, however the merits of a version of FEF have been touted since 2006. Our elected officials agree that education is an important obligation, but differ on how best to address education in relation to other needs in our state.
• Behind the scenes, however there is an undeniable political undertone. It is a bipartisan issue with many agreeing on its merits, but FEF has faced challenges and obstacles impeding passage. Opponents have gone on record to state FEF puts necessary social services at risk.
• The intent of FEF is not to take away valuable resources or limit access to social services, the goal is to remove the politics by fully funding educations before anything else alongside viewing FEF as a long term solution toward solving our social issues.
Our Action
• Through our policy journey we’ve personally had the opportunity to engage with supporters of FEF. In its previous 2012 incarnation, our policy team had the opportunity to speak with the bill’s former primary supporter; we were extolled in the merits of its passage and the future benefits for our youth.
• I’ve personally had the opportunity to speak with local school board members; high school principals/superintendents within the Yakima Valley, tribal leaders, Representative Cathy Dahlquist, Senator Honeyford and members of my policy project team have also been in direct contact with officials such as with Representative Kathy Haigh.
• We’ve sought advice and opinions on how best we can aid in the passage of this bill. There have also been some misses in our process, we have tried to make contact with some of our elected officials and have not received a reply or have only spoke with aides.
Long Term implications of Education Funding
• What it really comes down to for me is I want the best for my child. I’m sure everyone in the room wants the best for their child. If it’s in our means, many of us opt to live in
“nicer” communities in order to have our children go to school in a better performing school district with better education standards. I admit I’m guilty of that.
• When it came time to start my career, I chose to buy a house in a school district that consistently performed well on standardized tests. Along with improved test scores comes additional investment; Selah also has one of the highest property taxes in Yakima Co. The members of my community have spoken loudly when it comes to education. Since 2003 several levies have passed and additional taxes have been assessed to fund the education gap.
• Through the passage of FEF children throughout our state, no matter the school district or county, would receive a fully funded education. By fully funding education, we will be providing our children more than the three R’s we would be preparing them for higher education, employment, and citizenship.
• Improving the educational standards would put our children on equal footing with other students throughout the country and world further allowing them to compete for access to colleges and universities. Large corporations, as well as other specialized fields, are actively seeking qualified applicants from around the globe, jobs that through education that could be held by WA state graduates.
Why this Bill matters
• In addition, this house bill allows for improved educational standards but it also lays the foundation toward improving social issues. Through our AgForestry process we’ve been exposed to various social issues in our state including homelessness, drug and alcohol addiction, mental illness, and the adult and juvenile prison system. While most of us are in agreement that many social issues stem from home environment or lack of resources (financial, medical, or otherwise).
• The education system is not intended to act in the role of parent, although it does provide the opportunity for early learning through full day kindergarten. There are also provisions for smaller classrooms and longer school days for more time in the classroom. This bill provides help to students at risk for dropping out or in need of supplemental instruction or services. HB1174 also provides for students already performing at high academic level by providing college credit incentives.
Opposition
• Those opposed to FEF often state “a hungry, sick child cannot learn”, this statement is intended to focus attention on the potential of downsizing social services in favor of
education. School districts, through USDA offer free and reduced meal options. In Selah school district, the lunch rate for a high school lunch is $2.80 or $504 per year and the reduced lunch option is $0.40 or $72 per year. Many school districts also offer free breakfast and lunch services to kids under 18.
• I talked with Selah school nurse Sharon Conrad RN; she stated that all districts in Washington state are mandated to offer annual vision and hearing screenings at the preschool-3rd grade and 5th-7th grade, the district also hosts a free vaccination clinics at the beginning of every school year. Sharon also shared that most districts have a nurse on staff, and that schools in the Seattle school district have free clinics with the middle school and high schools. I looked this up and found that Seattle public schools does offer health care centers for middle and high school students. The following is an excerpt from the Seattle Public School web page:
“Health care centers are staffed with school nurses, nurse practitioners, and mental health counselors. They provide all the services that family doctors provide and do so in a teen friendly setting. These services include medical checkups, routine and sports physicals, reproductive health care, treatment for acute and chronic illness, immunizations, vision/hearing screenings, dental referral, lab tests as well as education on how to live a healthy life. They also provide mental health counseling in addition to preventative education on tobacco, alcohol, and other drug use, injuries and violence.” (http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/cms/pages.phtmlsessionid=&pageid=219316).
• House Bill 1774 will make leaps and bounds toward improving the lives of kids through a better education and future success, but ultimately the benefits will be the to the families, the community, and the future of Washington State.
Legislators who contributed to this policy project
Gary Alexander R 2nd 360-786-7824
Arguing for a fundamental structural change
1st pass an Ed budget, then decide on how to spend the rest
Disagrees with Ross Hunter’s claim that FEF would create a political morass
Rep. Frank Chopp D 43rd 360-786-7920
Rep. Cathy Dahlquist R 31st 360-786-7846
Heavy hitter for Education reform – calling Dems out: “Where have you been on solving Ed Funding problem?”
Great story about Katie and Tyler refuting the Ed vs Health/welfare argument used by Dems
Dropped HB1174
Sen. Bruce Dammeier R 25th 360-786-7648
Just moved to senate – known as most knowledgeable Ed legislator in Olympia
Major sponsor of SB5445
Met with our group last year and has been willing to discuss further several times by phone
Susan Fagan R 9th 360-786-7942
“Wash. State Supreme Ct. very clear” read ‘paramount duty’ clause on the floor during HR4608 debate
1 of 4 on the Joint Legislative Task Force
Explained 2261 & 2776 (passed in 2010) redefined basic Ed and restructured funding formula. Said these were promising reforms that would remedy the problem if fully funded.
Kathy Haigh D 35th 360-786-7966
One of two Democrats signed onto the bill, unclear as to why there was not more bi-partisan support for the legislation.
Rep. Brad Hawkins R 12th 360-786-7832
Freshman in the House.
Big Ed supporter and has an open communication channel w/ me.
Won’t meet with lobbyists without a constituent in tow
Rep. Ross Hunter D 48th 360-786-7936
Known education reformer, but resistant of current Republican push to reform spending
Claims HB1174 would elevate form over substance
Claims budgetary process would be a nightmare, adding at least a month to the session
Claims HB1174 would break the connection between policy and spending, but then made an argument that was inconsistent with this logic.
Rep. Chris Hurst D 31st 360-786-7866
Same district as Dahlquist
Drew MacEwen R 35th 360-786-7902
Tired of rhetoric
Kids are taking the hit: drop-out rates up, path out of poverty is a quality education
“Legislature must stop holding Ed funding hostage for other political means”
Wants to adopt a new rule: Legislature no longer hold kids hostage
Chad Magendanz R 41st 360-786-7876
“Can’t prioritize everything”
Quoted Obama: “Best anti-poverty measure is a World Class Education” – Washington State founders couldn’t agree more
“Fund Ed First doesn’t mean ‘Fund Ed only’”
Pointed to Doran decision in 1983 – we’re repeating the same mistakes
Marcie Maxwell D 41st 360-786-7894
Health & Welfare is 1st
Believes in strong Ed funding but students need more and families need more
Timm Ormsby D 3rd 360-786-7946
Obligation to provide a foundation to youth,
Curved Ed spending discussion into a health/welfare VS Ed debate
Explained funding Education as a separate but equal debate, argued an equal obligation to drug abusers, elderly, those without food security
Pat Sullivan D 47th 360-786-7858
House Majority Leader
Claimed Washington has best SAT scores in the nation (10 years running) – which is false – we’re in the middle of the pack
Opportunity gap is growing – the system is rigged against the poorest schools
Pitting services against welfare, rejects abandoning caring for the elderly for Ed funding
JT Wilcox R 2nd 360-786-7912
Dropped HR4608 – permanent change to House Rules (FEF attempt from the rules side rather than a bill)
10 years of failure to live up to Paramount Duty – see McCleary Decision
Voters have confirmed their desire to see Legislators live up to their legal duty over and over again
Other contacts
Brian Hardtke Rep. Caucus House Ed / Higher Ed 360-786-7241
Solid contact for all Ed bills. He’s the one that works on these bills with the House Rep. Caucus
Jim Crawford OFM – Gov’s budget staff 360-402-3123
Works on Governor’s budget
Brought up unintended consequences of passing a bill that forces legislators to do something different than they are comfortable with
Expects passage to result in a quick and dirty Ed bill, followed by adjustments in the omnibus bill that follows
Brian Flones Wenatchee SD Superintendent 509-663-8161
Very active/respected in the WASA community
Cathi Nelson Waterville SD Superintendent 509-669-1424
Local contact to Education issues
Dan Steele WASA Asst. Exec. Director 360-489-3642
Main policy lobbyist for Washington Assoc. of School Administrators
Conrad, Sharon. School RN, Selah.
Insight on day to day school funding challenges
Funding
47th in student to teacher ratio (National Education Association)
49th in Students in ADA per teacher (NEA)
21st in Teacher salaries, but still well below national average (WEA)
43rd in Teacher Salary growth, but is actually negative with a 1% decrease. (NEA)
40th in teacher salary increase over last decade (NEA)
25th in public school revenue per student (NEA)
43rd in School funding from combined state and local gov. (WEA)
48th. in overall School Funding (WEA)
13th in total state population (NEA)
33rd in percent of population in k-12 ages (NEA)
19th in percent change in public school enrollment at 0.5% (NEA)
Performance
25th in SAT scores (National Education Association)
24th in overall K‐12 achievement (Education Week)
21st in Daily attendance (National Education Association)
32nd in Math scores (National Education Association)
21st in Reading scores (National Education Association)
34th in High School Graduation Rate (U.S. Department of Education)
48th in Transitions and alignment (Education Week)
26th in Teacher Performance (Education Week)
International Performance
U.S. ranks 17th in combined scores out of the 40 Developed nations
U.S. ranks 19th in school funding
HB 1174 - DIGEST
Reprioritizes the phase-in schedule for additional stateinvestments found in chapter 236, Laws of 2010, to fully fundall-day kindergarten by the 2014-2015 school year; K-3 classsize reductions and increased instructional hours by the2016-2017 school year; and materials, supplies, and operatingcosts and pupil transportation by the 2018-2019 school year.
Requires all appropriations for K-12 basic education,together with appropriations for other K-12 educationprograms, to be enacted into law before the legislature takesexecutive action on other omnibus appropriations legislation.
H-0364.2 _____________________________________________HOUSE BILL 1174
_____________________________________________State of Washington 63rd Legislature 2013 Regular SessionBy Representatives Dahlquist, Haigh, Magendanz, Hurst, Wilcox, Fagan,Parker, Hawkins, Hayes, Hargrove, Warnick, Pike, Chandler, Haler,Ross, Schmick, Taylor, Buys, Alexander, Smith, Zeiger, Johnson, Short,MacEwen, Holy, Shea, and VickRead first time 01/17/13. Referred to Committee on Appropriations.
1 AN ACT Relating to complying with the state's constitutional duty 2 to make ample provision for a basic education by prioritizing state 3 funding for K-12 education and targeting state investments on reforms 4 with the highest impact on student success; amending RCW 28A.150.380, 5 28A.150.220, 28A.150.260, 28A.150.315, and 28A.160.192; adding a new 6 section to chapter 44.04 RCW; creating a new section; and declaring an 7 emergency.
8 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
9 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. (1) Article IX of the Washington state10 Constitution specifies that "it is the paramount duty of the state to11 make ample provision for the education of all children residing within12 its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race,13 color, caste, or sex." In McCleary v. State of Washington, the14 Washington state supreme court affirmed that "paramount" in the context15 of Article IX means that the state must "amply provide for the16 education of all Washington children as the state's first and highest17 priority before any other state programs or operations." Therefore, to18 ensure compliance with the state's Article IX duty, the legislature
p. 1 HB 1174
1 intends to fund K-12 education first, fully, and separately, before any 2 other state programs or operations. 3 (2) Furthermore, the legislature recognizes the critical importance 4 of children's early academic years on their long-term success. A 5 robust body of high-quality research shows that access to full-day 6 kindergarten leads to greater academic achievement and better social- 7 emotional outcomes. Smaller class sizes for our youngest learners mean 8 more opportunity to personalize instruction and provide early 9 interventions for children. Therefore, in recognition of these facts10 and for educational policy reasons, the legislature intends to11 reprioritize the phase-in schedule for additional state investments12 found in chapter 236, Laws of 2010, to fully fund all-day kindergarten13 by the 2014-15 school year; K-3 class size reductions and increased14 instructional hours by the 2016-17 school year; and materials,15 supplies, and operating costs and pupil transportation by the 2018-1916 school year.
17 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 44.04 RCW18 to read as follows:19 (1) Under Article IX, section 1 of the state Constitution, it is20 the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the21 education of all of Washington's children. According to the state22 supreme court, this constitutional provision requires that the23 legislature define and fully fund a program of K-12 basic education24 before the legislature funds any other statutory programs. For these25 reasons, it is the intent of the legislature to require that all26 appropriations for K-12 basic education, together with appropriations27 for other K-12 education programs, be enacted into law before the28 legislature takes executive action on other omnibus appropriations29 legislation.30 (2) As of the effective date of this section, appropriations for31 the purposes of RCW 28A.150.380 and other K-12 education purposes must32 be enacted into law before it is in order for either house of the33 legislature to take executive action on omnibus operating or34 transportation appropriations legislation.35 (3) The house of representatives and senate, jointly or separately,36 may adopt rules or resolutions to implement their respective37 responsibilities under this section.
HB 1174 p. 2
1 Sec. 3. RCW 28A.150.380 and 2012 1st sp.s. c 10 s 3 are each 2 amended to read as follows: 3 (1) The state legislature shall, at each regular session in an odd- 4 numbered year, appropriate for the current use of the common schools 5 such amounts as needed for state support to school districts during the 6 ensuing biennium for the program of basic education under RCW 7 28A.150.200. 8 (2) In addition to those state funds provided to school districts 9 for basic education, the legislature may appropriate funds to be10 distributed to school districts for other factors and for other special11 programs to enhance or enrich the program of basic education.12 (3) As of the effective date of this section, appropriations for13 the purposes of this section and other K-12 education purposes must be14 made in legislation that is separate from the omnibus operating15 appropriations act. Such appropriations must be enacted into law16 before it is in order for either house of the legislature to take17 executive action on omnibus operating appropriations legislation.18 (4) As of the effective date of this section, appropriations for19 the purposes of phasing-in enhanced state funding for all-day20 kindergarten; K-3 class size; increased minimum instructional hours;21 materials, supplies, and operating costs; and pupil transportation must22 be made in priority order as provided in this subsection. For the five23 items specified in this subsection, no increased appropriations beyond24 maintenance-level adjustments or adjustments to reflect changes in25 state allocations for employee salaries and benefits may be made for a26 lower priority item until funding for the next highest priority item is27 fully phased-in. The priority order for phasing-in enhanced state28 funding is as follows:29 (a) First priority: All-day kindergarten according to the timeline30 under RCW 28A.150.315;31 (b) Second priority: Reduced K-3 class size according to the32 timeline under RCW 28A.150.260(4)(b);33 (c) Third priority: Increased minimum instructional hours34 according to the timeline under RCW 28A.150.220(2)(a);35 (d) Fourth priority: Increased allocations for materials,36 supplies, and operating costs according to the timeline under RCW37 28A.150.260(8)(b); and
p. 3 HB 1174
1 (e) Fifth priority: Increased allocations for pupil transportation 2 according to the timeline under RCW 28A.160.192.
3 Sec. 4. RCW 28A.150.220 and 2011 1st sp.s. c 27 s 1 are each 4 amended to read as follows: 5 (1) In order for students to have the opportunity to develop the 6 basic education knowledge and skills under RCW 28A.150.210, school 7 districts must provide instruction of sufficient quantity and quality 8 and give students the opportunity to complete graduation requirements 9 that are intended to prepare them for postsecondary education, gainful10 employment, and citizenship. The program established under this11 section shall be the minimum instructional program of basic education12 offered by school districts.13 (2) Each school district shall make available to students the14 following minimum instructional offering each school year:15 (a) For students enrolled in grades one through twelve, at least a16 district-wide annual average of one thousand hours, which shall be17 increased district-wide to at least one thousand eighty instructional18 hours for students enrolled in each of grades seven through twelve and19 at least one thousand instructional hours for students in each of20 grades one through six ((according to an implementation schedule21 adopted by the legislature, but not before the 2014-15)) beginning with22 the 2016-17 school year; and23 (b) For students enrolled in kindergarten, at least four hundred24 fifty instructional hours, which shall be increased to at least one25 thousand instructional hours according to the implementation schedule26 under RCW 28A.150.315.27 (3) The instructional program of basic education provided by each28 school district shall include:29 (a) Instruction in the essential academic learning requirements30 under RCW 28A.655.070;31 (b) Instruction that provides students the opportunity to complete32 twenty-four credits for high school graduation, subject to a phased-in33 implementation of the twenty-four credits as established by the34 legislature. Course distribution requirements may be established by35 the state board of education under RCW 28A.230.090;36 (c) If the essential academic learning requirements include a
HB 1174 p. 4
1 requirement of languages other than English, the requirement may be met 2 by students receiving instruction in one or more American Indian 3 languages; 4 (d) Supplemental instruction and services for underachieving 5 students through the learning assistance program under RCW 28A.165.005 6 through 28A.165.065; 7 (e) Supplemental instruction and services for eligible and enrolled 8 students whose primary language is other than English through the 9 transitional bilingual instruction program under RCW 28A.180.01010 through 28A.180.080;11 (f) The opportunity for an appropriate education at public expense12 as defined by RCW 28A.155.020 for all eligible students with13 disabilities as defined in RCW 28A.155.020; and14 (g) Programs for highly capable students under RCW 28A.185.01015 through 28A.185.030.16 (4) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to require17 individual students to attend school for any particular number of hours18 per day or to take any particular courses.19 (5) Each school district's kindergarten through twelfth grade basic20 educational program shall be accessible to all students who are five21 years of age, as provided by RCW 28A.225.160, and less than twenty-one22 years of age and shall consist of a minimum of one hundred eighty23 school days per school year in such grades as are conducted by a school24 district, and one hundred eighty half-days of instruction, or25 equivalent, in kindergarten, to be increased to a minimum of one26 hundred eighty school days per school year according to the27 implementation schedule under RCW 28A.150.315. However, effective May28 1, 1979, a school district may schedule the last five school days of29 the one hundred and eighty day school year for noninstructional30 purposes in the case of students who are graduating from high school,31 including, but not limited to, the observance of graduation and early32 release from school upon the request of a student, and all such33 students may be claimed as a full-time equivalent student to the extent34 they could otherwise have been so claimed for the purposes of RCW35 28A.150.250 and 28A.150.260.36 (6) Nothing in this section precludes a school district from37 enriching the instructional program of basic education, such as
p. 5 HB 1174
1 offering additional instruction or providing additional services, 2 programs, or activities that the school district determines to be 3 appropriate for the education of the school district's students. 4 (7) The state board of education shall adopt rules to implement and 5 ensure compliance with the program requirements imposed by this 6 section, RCW 28A.150.250 and 28A.150.260, and such related supplemental 7 program approval requirements as the state board may establish.
8 Sec. 5. RCW 28A.150.260 and 2011 1st sp.s. c 27 s 2 are each 9 amended to read as follows:10 The purpose of this section is to provide for the allocation of11 state funding that the legislature deems necessary to support school12 districts in offering the minimum instructional program of basic13 education under RCW 28A.150.220. The allocation shall be determined as14 follows:15 (1) The governor shall and the superintendent of public instruction16 may recommend to the legislature a formula for the distribution of a17 basic education instructional allocation for each common school18 district.19 (2) The distribution formula under this section shall be for20 allocation purposes only. Except as may be required under chapter21 28A.155, 28A.165, 28A.180, or 28A.185 RCW, or federal laws and22 regulations, nothing in this section requires school districts to use23 basic education instructional funds to implement a particular24 instructional approach or service. Nothing in this section requires25 school districts to maintain a particular classroom teacher-to-student26 ratio or other staff-to-student ratio or to use allocated funds to pay27 for particular types or classifications of staff. Nothing in this28 section entitles an individual teacher to a particular teacher planning29 period.30 (3)(a) To the extent the technical details of the formula have been31 adopted by the legislature and except when specifically provided as a32 school district allocation, the distribution formula for the basic33 education instructional allocation shall be based on minimum staffing34 and nonstaff costs the legislature deems necessary to support35 instruction and operations in prototypical schools serving high,36 middle, and elementary school students as provided in this section.37 The use of prototypical schools for the distribution formula does not
HB 1174 p. 6
1 constitute legislative intent that schools should be operated or 2 structured in a similar fashion as the prototypes. Prototypical 3 schools illustrate the level of resources needed to operate a school of 4 a particular size with particular types and grade levels of students 5 using commonly understood terms and inputs, such as class size, hours 6 of instruction, and various categories of school staff. It is the 7 intent that the funding allocations to school districts be adjusted 8 from the school prototypes based on the actual number of annual average 9 full-time equivalent students in each grade level at each school in the10 district and not based on the grade-level configuration of the school11 to the extent that data is available. The allocations shall be further12 adjusted from the school prototypes with minimum allocations for small13 schools and to reflect other factors identified in the omnibus14 appropriations act.15 (b) For the purposes of this section, prototypical schools are16 defined as follows:17 (i) A prototypical high school has six hundred average annual full-18 time equivalent students in grades nine through twelve;19 (ii) A prototypical middle school has four hundred thirty-two20 average annual full-time equivalent students in grades seven and eight;21 and22 (iii) A prototypical elementary school has four hundred average23 annual full-time equivalent students in grades kindergarten through24 six.25 (4)(a) The minimum allocation for each level of prototypical school26 shall be based on the number of full-time equivalent classroom teachers27 needed to provide instruction over the minimum required annual28 instructional hours under RCW 28A.150.220 and provide at least one29 teacher planning period per school day, and based on the following30 general education average class size of full-time equivalent students31 per teacher:32 General education33 average34 class size35 Grades K-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.2336 Grade 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.0037 Grades 5-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.0038 Grades 7-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.53
p. 7 HB 1174
1 Grades 9-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.74 2 (b) ((During the 2011-2013 biennium)) Following the priority order 3 and provisions of RCW 28A.150.380 and beginning with schools with the 4 highest percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price 5 meals in the prior school year, the general education average class 6 size for grades K-3 shall be reduced until the average class size 7 funded under this subsection (4) is no more than 17.0 full-time 8 equivalent students per teacher beginning in the ((2017-18)) 2016-17 9 school year.10 (c) The minimum allocation for each prototypical middle and high11 school shall also provide for full-time equivalent classroom teachers12 based on the following number of full-time equivalent students per13 teacher in career and technical education:14 Career and technical15 education average16 class size17 Approved career and technical education offered at18 the middle school and high school level . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.5719 Skill center programs meeting the standards established20 by the office of the superintendent of public21 instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22.7622 (d) In addition, the omnibus appropriations act shall at a minimum23 specify:24 (i) A high-poverty average class size in schools where more than25 fifty percent of the students are eligible for free and reduced-price26 meals; and27 (ii) A specialty average class size for laboratory science,28 advanced placement, and international baccalaureate courses.29 (e) Funding enhancements in addition to the allocations provided in30 this section to support increased instructional hours required under31 RCW 28A.150.220(2)(a) shall be specified in the omnibus appropriations32 act, following the priority order and provisions of RCW 28A.150.380.33 (5) The minimum allocation for each level of prototypical school34 shall include allocations for the following types of staff in addition35 to classroom teachers:36
HB 1174 p. 8
1
2 3
Elementary
School
Middle
School
High
School
4 5
Principals, assistant principals, and other certificated building-level
20 (6)(a) The minimum staffing allocation for each school district to21 provide district-wide support services shall be allocated per one22 thousand annual average full-time equivalent students in grades K-12 as23 follows:24 Staff per 1,00025 K-12 students26 Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.62827 Facilities, maintenance, and grounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.81328 Warehouse, laborers, and mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.33229 (b) The minimum allocation of staff units for each school district30 to support certificated and classified staffing of central31 administration shall be 5.30 percent of the staff units generated under32 subsections (4)(a) and (b) and (5) of this section and (a) of this33 subsection.34 (7) The distribution formula shall include staffing allocations to
p. 9 HB 1174
1 school districts for career and technical education and skill center 2 administrative and other school-level certificated staff, as specified 3 in the omnibus appropriations act. 4 (8)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, the minimum 5 allocation for each school district shall include allocations per 6 annual average full-time equivalent student for the following 7 materials, supplies, and operating costs, to be adjusted for inflation 8 from the 2008-09 school year: 9 Per annual average10 full-time equivalent student11 in grades K-1212 Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $54.4313 Utilities and insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$147.9014 Curriculum and textbooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$58.4415 Other supplies and library materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $124.0716 Instructional professional development for certified and17 classified staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $9.0418 Facilities maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$73.2719 Security and central office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50.7620 (b) ((During the 2011-2013 biennium,)) The minimum allocation for21 ((maintenance)) materials, supplies, and operating costs shall be22 increased as specified in the omnibus appropriations act following the23 priority order and provisions of RCW 28A.150.380. The following24 allocations, adjusted for inflation from the 2007-08 school year, are25 provided in the ((2015-16)) 2018-19 school year, after which the26 allocations shall be adjusted annually for inflation as specified in27 the omnibus appropriations act:28 Per annual average29 full-time equivalent student30 in grades K-1231 Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $113.8032 Utilities and insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$309.2133 Curriculum and textbooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $122.1734 Other supplies and library materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $259.3935 Instructional professional development for certificated and36 classified staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $18.8937 Facilities maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $153.18
HB 1174 p. 10
1 Security and central office administration . . . . . . . . . . . $106.12 2 (9) In addition to the amounts provided in subsection (8) of this 3 section, the omnibus appropriations act shall provide an amount based 4 on full-time equivalent student enrollment in each of the following: 5 (a) Exploratory career and technical education courses for students 6 in grades seven through twelve; 7 (b) Laboratory science courses for students in grades nine through 8 twelve; 9 (c) Preparatory career and technical education courses for students10 in grades nine through twelve offered in a high school; and11 (d) Preparatory career and technical education courses for students12 in grades eleven and twelve offered through a skill center.13 (10) In addition to the allocations otherwise provided under this14 section, amounts shall be provided to support the following programs15 and services:16 (a) To provide supplemental instruction and services for17 underachieving students through the learning assistance program under18 RCW 28A.165.005 through 28A.165.065, allocations shall be based on the19 district percentage of students in grades K-12 who were eligible for20 free or reduced-price meals in the prior school year. The minimum21 allocation for the program shall provide for each level of prototypical22 school resources to provide, on a statewide average, 1.5156 hours per23 week in extra instruction with a class size of fifteen learning24 assistance program students per teacher.25 (b) To provide supplemental instruction and services for students26 whose primary language is other than English, allocations shall be27 based on the head count number of students in each school who are28 eligible for and enrolled in the transitional bilingual instruction29 program under RCW 28A.180.010 through 28A.180.080. The minimum30 allocation for each level of prototypical school shall provide31 resources to provide, on a statewide average, 4.7780 hours per week in32 extra instruction with fifteen transitional bilingual instruction33 program students per teacher. Notwithstanding other provisions of this34 subsection (10), the actual per-student allocation may be scaled to35 provide a larger allocation for students needing more intensive36 intervention and a commensurate reduced allocation for students needing37 less intensive intervention, as detailed in the omnibus appropriations38 act.
p. 11 HB 1174
1 (c) To provide additional allocations to support programs for 2 highly capable students under RCW 28A.185.010 through 28A.185.030, 3 allocations shall be based on two and three hundred fourteen one- 4 thousandths percent of each school district's full-time equivalent 5 basic education enrollment. The minimum allocation for the programs 6 shall provide resources to provide, on a statewide average, 2.1590 7 hours per week in extra instruction with fifteen highly capable program 8 students per teacher. 9 (11) The allocations under subsections (4)(a) and (b), (5), (6),10 and (8) of this section shall be enhanced as provided under RCW11 28A.150.390 on an excess cost basis to provide supplemental12 instructional resources for students with disabilities.13 (12)(a) For the purposes of allocations for prototypical high14 schools and middle schools under subsections (4) and (10) of this15 section that are based on the percent of students in the school who are16 eligible for free and reduced-price meals, the actual percent of such17 students in a school shall be adjusted by a factor identified in the18 omnibus appropriations act to reflect underreporting of free and19 reduced-price meal eligibility among middle and high school students.20 (b) Allocations or enhancements provided under subsections (4),21 (7), and (9) of this section for exploratory and preparatory career and22 technical education courses shall be provided only for courses approved23 by the office of the superintendent of public instruction under chapter24 28A.700 RCW.25 (13)(a) This formula for distribution of basic education funds26 shall be reviewed biennially by the superintendent and governor. The27 recommended formula shall be subject to approval, amendment or28 rejection by the legislature.29 (b) In the event the legislature rejects the distribution formula30 recommended by the governor, without adopting a new distribution31 formula, the distribution formula for the previous school year shall32 remain in effect.33 (c) The enrollment of any district shall be the annual average34 number of full-time equivalent students and part-time students as35 provided in RCW 28A.150.350, enrolled on the first school day of each36 month, including students who are in attendance pursuant to RCW37 28A.335.160 and 28A.225.250 who do not reside within the servicing38 school district. The definition of full-time equivalent student shall
HB 1174 p. 12
1 be determined by rules of the superintendent of public instruction and 2 shall be included as part of the superintendent's biennial budget 3 request. The definition shall be based on the minimum instructional 4 hour offerings required under RCW 28A.150.220. Any revision of the 5 present definition shall not take effect until approved by the house 6 ways and means committee and the senate ways and means committee. 7 (d) The office of financial management shall make a monthly review 8 of the superintendent's reported full-time equivalent students in the 9 common schools in conjunction with RCW 43.62.050.
10 Sec. 6. RCW 28A.150.315 and 2012 c 51 s 1 are each amended to read11 as follows:12 (1) Beginning with the 2007-08 school year, funding for voluntary13 all-day kindergarten programs shall be phased-in beginning with schools14 with the highest poverty levels, defined as those schools with the15 highest percentages of students qualifying for free and reduced-price16 lunch support in the prior school year. (( During the 2011-201317 biennium,)) Funding shall continue to be phased-in ((each year))18 following the priority order and provisions of RCW 28A.150.380 until19 full statewide implementation of all-day kindergarten is achieved in20 the ((2017-18)) 2014-15 school year. Once a school receives funding21 for the all-day kindergarten program, that school shall remain eligible22 for funding in subsequent school years regardless of changes in the23 school's percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price24 lunches as long as other program requirements are fulfilled.25 Additionally, schools receiving all-day kindergarten program support26 shall agree to the following conditions:27 (a) Provide at least a one thousand-hour instructional program;28 (b) Provide a curriculum that offers a rich, varied set of29 experiences that assist students in:30 (i) Developing initial skills in the academic areas of reading,31 mathematics, and writing;32 (ii) Developing a variety of communication skills;33 (iii) Providing experiences in science, social studies, arts,34 health and physical education, and a world language other than English;35 (iv) Acquiring large and small motor skills;36 (v) Acquiring social and emotional skills including successful
p. 13 HB 1174
1 participation in learning activities as an individual and as part of a 2 group; and 3 (vi) Learning through hands-on experiences; 4 (c) Establish learning environments that are developmentally 5 appropriate and promote creativity; 6 (d) Demonstrate strong connections and communication with early 7 learning community providers; and 8 (e) Participate in kindergarten program readiness activities with 9 early learning providers and parents.10 (2)(a) It is the intent of the legislature that administration of11 the Washington kindergarten inventory of developing skills as required12 in this subsection (2) and RCW 28A.655.080 replace administration of13 other assessments being required by school districts or that other14 assessments only be administered if they seek to obtain information not15 covered by the Washington kindergarten inventory of developing skills.16 (b) In addition to the requirements in subsection (1) of this17 section and to the extent funds are available, beginning with the 2011-18 12 school year on a voluntary basis, schools must identify the skills,19 knowledge, and characteristics of kindergarten students at the20 beginning of the school year in order to support social-emotional,21 physical, and cognitive growth and development of individual children;22 support early learning provider and parent involvement; and inform23 instruction. Kindergarten teachers shall administer the Washington24 kindergarten inventory of developing skills, as directed by the25 superintendent of public instruction in consultation with the26 department of early learning and in collaboration with the27 nongovernmental private-public partnership designated in RCW28 43.215.070, and report the results to the superintendent. The29 superintendent shall share the results with the director of the30 department of early learning.31 (c) School districts shall provide an opportunity for parents and32 guardians to excuse their children from participation in the Washington33 kindergarten inventory of developing skills.34 (3) Subject to funds appropriated for this purpose, the35 superintendent of public instruction shall designate one or more school36 districts to serve as resources and examples of best practices in37 designing and operating a high-quality all-day kindergarten program.38 Designated school districts shall serve as lighthouse programs and
HB 1174 p. 14
1 provide technical assistance to other school districts in the initial 2 stages of implementing an all-day kindergarten program. Examples of 3 topics addressed by the technical assistance include strategic 4 planning, developing the instructional program and curriculum, working 5 with early learning providers to identify students and communicate with 6 parents, and developing kindergarten program readiness activities.
7 Sec. 7. RCW 28A.160.192 and 2011 1st sp.s. c 27 s 3 are each 8 amended to read as follows: 9 (1) The superintendent of public instruction shall phase-in the10 implementation of the distribution formula under this chapter for11 allocating state funds to school districts for the transportation of12 students to and from school. The phase-in shall begin no later than13 the 2011-2013 biennium, follow the priority order and provisions of RCW14 28A.150.380, and be fully implemented by the ((2013-2015 biennium))15 2018-19 school year.16 (a) The formula must be developed and revised on an ongoing basis17 using the major cost factors in student transportation, including basic18 and special student loads, school district land area, average distance19 to school, roadway miles, and number of locations served. Factors must20 include all those site characteristics that are statistically21 significant after analysis of the data required by the revised22 reporting process.23 (b) The formula must allocate funds to school districts based on24 the average predicted costs of transporting students to and from25 school, using a regression analysis. Only factors that are26 statistically significant shall be used in the regression analysis.27 Employee compensation costs included in the allowable transportation28 expenditures used for the purpose of establishing each school29 district's independent variable in the regression analysis shall be30 limited to the base salary or hourly wage rates, fringe benefit rates,31 and applicable health care rates provided in the omnibus appropriations32 act.33 (2) During the phase-in period, funding provided to school34 districts for student transportation operations shall be distributed on35 the following basis:36 (a) Annually, each school district shall receive the lesser of the37 previous school year's pupil transportation operations allocation, or
p. 15 HB 1174
1 the total of allowable pupil transportation expenditures identified on 2 the previous school year's final expenditure report to the state plus 3 district indirect expenses using the federal restricted indirect rate 4 as calculated in the district annual financial report; 5 (b) Annually, the amount identified in (a) of this subsection shall 6 be adjusted for any budgeted increases provided in the omnibus 7 appropriations act for salaries or fringe benefits; 8 (c) Annually, any funds appropriated by the legislature in excess 9 of the maintenance level funding amount for student transportation10 shall be distributed among school districts on a prorated basis using11 the difference between the amount identified in (a) adjusted by (b) of12 this subsection and the amount determined under the formula in RCW13 28A.160.180; and14 (d) Allocations provided to recognize the cost of depreciation to15 districts contracting with private carriers for student transportation16 shall be deducted from the allowable transportation expenditures in (a)17 of this subsection.
18 NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. This act is necessary for the immediate19 preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the20 state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect21 immediately.
--- END ---
HB 1174 p. 16
H-3401.1 _____________________________________________HOUSE BILL 2533
_____________________________________________State of Washington 62nd Legislature 2012 Regular SessionBy Representatives Dammeier, Haigh, Dahlquist, Finn, Anderson,Miloscia, Fagan, Kelley, Hargrove, Eddy, Harris, Probst, Wilcox,Haler, Parker, Alexander, Taylor, Ross, Kristiansen, DeBolt, Kretz,Shea, Short, Bailey, Zeiger, Smith, Pearson, and HurstRead first time 01/17/12. Referred to Committee on EducationAppropriations & Oversight.
1 AN ACT Relating to prioritizing expenditures for K-12 education 2 within the state appropriations process; reenacting and amending RCW 3 28A.150.380; adding new sections to chapter 44.04 RCW; and declaring an 4 emergency.
5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
6 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 44.04 RCW 7 to read as follows: 8 Under Article IX, section 1 of the state Constitution, it is the 9 paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education10 of all of Washington's children. According to the state supreme court,11 this constitutional provision requires that the state must amply12 provide for the education of all Washington children as the state's13 first and highest priority before any other state programs or14 operations. For these reasons, it is the intent of the legislature to15 require that all appropriations for K-12 basic education, together with16 appropriations for other K-12 education programs, be enacted into law17 before the legislature takes executive action on other omnibus18 appropriations legislation.
p. 1 HB 2533
1 Sec. 2. RCW 28A.150.380 and 2009 c 548 s 110 and 2009 c 479 s 16 2 are each reenacted and amended to read as follows: 3 (1) The state legislature shall, at each regular session in an odd- 4 numbered year, appropriate for the current use of the common schools 5 such amounts as needed for state support to school districts during the 6 ensuing biennium for the program of basic education under RCW 7 28A.150.200. 8 (2) In addition to those state funds provided to school districts 9 for basic education, the legislature may appropriate funds to be10 distributed to school districts for other factors and for other special11 programs to enhance or enrich the program of basic education.12 (3) The state legislature shall also, at each regular session in an13 odd-numbered year, appropriate from the general fund and education14 construction fund for the purposes of and in accordance with the15 provisions of the student achievement act during the ensuing biennium.16 (4) As of the effective date of this section, all appropriations17 for the purposes of this section and other K-12 education purposes,18 including any adjustments to biennial operating appropriations made in19 a supplemental operating appropriations act, must be made in20 legislation that is separate from the omnibus operating appropriations21 act. Such appropriations must be enacted into law before it is in22 order for either house of the legislature to take executive action on23 omnibus operating appropriations legislation.
24 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 44.04 RCW25 to read as follows:26 As of the effective date of this section, appropriations for the27 purposes of RCW 28A.150.380 and other K-12 education purposes must be28 enacted into law before it is in order for either house of the29 legislature to take executive action on omnibus operating or30 transportation appropriations legislation.31 The house of representatives and senate, jointly or separately, may32 adopt rules or resolutions to implement their respective33 responsibilities under this section.
34 NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. This act is necessary for the immediate35 preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the
HB 2533 p. 2
1 state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect 2 immediately.
--- END ---
p. 3 HB 2533
SB 5445 - DIGEST(SUBSTITUTED FOR - SEE 1ST SUB)
Funds capital projects.Authorizes the state finance committee to issue general
obligation bonds of the state in the sum of four hundredseventy-five million dollars, or as much thereof as may berequired, to finance capital projects and all costs incidentalthereto.
Makes appropriations.
S-1297.1 _____________________________________________SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5445
_____________________________________________State of Washington 63rd Legislature 2013 Regular SessionBy Senate Ways & Means (originally sponsored by Senators Honeyford,Schoesler, Dammeier, Braun, Parlette, Litzow, Baumgartner, Carrell,Sheldon, Ericksen, Becker, King, Fain, Bailey, and Tom)READ FIRST TIME 02/08/13.
1 AN ACT Relating to funding public school capital projects; adding 2 a new chapter to Title 43 RCW; creating new sections; making 3 appropriations; and declaring an emergency.
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
5 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. For the purpose of providing funds to 6 finance the public school projects described and authorized by the 7 legislature in the capital appropriations acts for the 2013-2015 fiscal 8 biennium, and all costs incidental thereto, the state finance committee 9 is authorized to issue general obligation bonds of the state of10 Washington in the sum of four hundred seventy-five million dollars, or11 as much thereof as may be required, to finance these projects and all12 costs incidental thereto. Bonds authorized in this section may be sold13 at such price as the state finance committee shall determine. No bonds14 authorized in this section may be offered for sale without prior15 legislative appropriation of the net proceeds of the sale of the bonds.
16 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. The proceeds from the sale of bonds17 authorized in section 1 of this act shall be deposited in the state18 building construction account created by RCW 43.83.020. These proceeds
p. 1 SSB 5445
1 shall be used exclusively for the purposes specified in this section 2 and for the payment of expenses incurred in the issuance and sale of 3 the bonds issued for the purposes of this section, and shall be 4 administered by the office of financial management subject to 5 legislative appropriation.
6 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. (1) The debt-limit general fund bond 7 retirement account shall be used for the payment of the principal of 8 and interest on the bonds authorized in section 1 of this act. 9 (2) The state finance committee shall, on or before June 30th of10 each year, certify to the state treasurer the amount needed in the11 ensuing twelve months to meet the bond retirement and interest12 requirements on the bonds authorized in section 1 of this act.13 (3) On each date on which any interest or principal and interest14 payment is due on bonds issued for the purposes of section 1 of this15 act the state treasurer shall withdraw from any general state revenues16 received in the state treasury and deposit in the debt-limit general17 fund bond retirement account an amount equal to the amount certified by18 the state finance committee to be due on the payment date.
19 NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. (1) Bonds issued under sections 1 through 320 of this act shall state that they are a general obligation of the state21 of Washington, shall pledge the full faith and credit of the state to22 the payment of the principal thereof and the interest thereon, and23 shall contain an unconditional promise to pay the principal and24 interest as the same shall become due.25 (2) The owner and holder of each of the bonds or the trustee for26 the owner and holder of any of the bonds may by mandamus or other27 appropriate proceeding require the transfer and payment of funds as28 directed in this section.
29 NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. The legislature may provide additional means30 for raising moneys for the payment of the principal of and interest on31 the bonds authorized in section 1 of this act, and sections 2 and 3 of32 this act shall not be deemed to provide an exclusive method for the33 payment.
SSB 5445 p. 2
1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. Sections 1 through 5 of this act constitute 2 a new chapter in Title 43 RCW.
3 NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. (1) A capital budget is hereby adopted and, 4 subject to the provisions set forth in this act, the several dollar 5 amounts hereinafter specified, or so much thereof as shall be 6 sufficient to accomplish the purposes designated, are hereby 7 appropriated and authorized to be incurred for capital projects during 8 the period beginning with the effective date of this section and ending 9 June 30, 2015, out of the several funds specified in this act.10 (2) The definitions in this subsection apply throughout this act11 unless the context clearly requires otherwise.12 (a) "Fiscal year 2014" or "FY 2014" means the period beginning July13 1, 2013, and ending June 30, 2014.14 (b) "Fiscal year 2015" or "FY 2015" means the period beginning July15 1, 2014, and ending June 30, 2015.16 (c) "Lapse" or "revert" means the amount shall return to an17 unappropriated status.18 (d) "Provided solely" means the specified amount may be spent only19 for the specified purpose.20 (3) Unless otherwise specifically authorized in this act, any21 portion of an amount provided solely for a specified purpose that is22 not expended subject to the specified conditions and limitations to23 fulfill the specified purpose shall lapse.24 (4) The amounts shown under the headings "Prior Biennia," "Future25 Biennia," and "Total" in this act are for informational purposes only26 and do not constitute legislative approval of these amounts. "Prior27 biennia" typically refers to the immediate prior biennium for28 reappropriations, but may refer to multiple biennia in the case of29 specific projects. A "future biennia" amount is an estimate of what30 may be appropriated for the project or program in the 2013-201531 biennium and the following three biennia; an amount of zero does not32 necessarily constitute legislative intent to not provide funding for33 the project or program in the future.34 (5) "Reappropriations" in this act are appropriations and, unless35 the context clearly provides otherwise, are subject to the relevant36 conditions and limitations applicable to appropriations.
p. 3 SSB 5445
1 Reappropriations shall be limited to the unexpended balances remaining 2 on June 30, 2013, from the 2011-2013 biennial appropriations for each 3 project.
4 NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION 5 School Security Improvement Grants (92000015) 6 The appropriation in this section is subject to the following 7 conditions and limitations: 8 (1) The appropriation is provided solely for nonrecurring costs 9 associated with school facility safety projects as described in10 subsections (2) and (3) of this section.11 (2) One-time grants to school districts to implement panic alarm12 systems developed:13 (a) In conjunction with the district's local law enforcement14 agency; or15 (b) By the superintendent of public instruction as a model policy.16 (3) One-time grants to school districts to assist with installation17 of security control mechanisms or systems. The superintendent shall18 prioritize grant requests by establishing criteria including, but not19 limited to, considering districts that receive state funds through the20 school construction assistance program in FY 2014 or FY 2015.21 Appropriation:22 Common School Construction Account--State . . . . . . . $10,000,00023 Prior Biennia (Expenditures) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$024 Future Biennia (Projected Costs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $025 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000,000
26 NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION27 2013-2015 School Construction Assistance Program - Maintenance28 (30000145)29 The appropriations in this section are subject to the following30 conditions and limitations:31 (1) $1,340,000 of the common school construction account--state32 appropriation is provided solely for study and survey grants and for33 completing inventory and building condition assessments for all public34 school districts once every six years.
SSB 5445 p. 4
1 (2) $933,000 of the common school construction account--state 2 appropriation is provided solely for mapping the design of new 3 facilities and remapping the design of facilities to be remodeled, for 4 school construction projects funded through the school construction 5 assistance program. 6 (3) $250,000 of the common school construction account--state is 7 provided solely for the development of recommendations on how the 8 school construction assistance program can better support state policy 9 objectives to reform and improve public education. A report describing10 the recommendations and their projected costs and benefits must be11 submitted to the appropriate committees of the legislature by September12 1, 2014. The superintendent of public instruction must convene an13 advisory group to assist in the development of these recommendations.14 The advisory group must include representation from general classroom15 teachers at various grade levels, teachers of subjects that require16 specialized facilities such as science laboratories and vocational17 facilities, school facility managers, school facility designers, and18 other experts on the relationship between the quality and design of19 educational facilities and student academic performance. The advisory20 group must review and consider findings and recommendations in the 200921 joint legislative task force on school construction funding. The22 recommendations must consider ways to provide financial assistance to23 develop and improve educational facilities to support at least the24 following policy objectives:25 (a) Greater access and more effective instruction in science,26 technology, engineering, and math;27 (b) Class size reduction in grades K-3;28 (c) Increased efficiency in the use of high-cost specialized school29 facilities, such as the shared use of specialized facilities at skill30 centers and community colleges;31 (d) Simplifying the school construction assistance program by32 scheduling multiple release dates each year;33 (e) Improving web-based access by taxpayers to school capacity and34 actual enrollment in order to understand possible opportunities to35 increase efficiency through consolidation. The office of the36 superintendent of public instruction must post this capacity and37 enrollment information on its web site.
p. 5 SSB 5445
1 (4) Funds from this appropriation may be used to match federal 2 dollars provided by the office of economic adjustment for school 3 replacement facilities located on military bases. 4 (5) The office of the superintendent of public instruction must 5 expedite the eligibility review, project approval process, and 6 contracting for any eligible grant under the school construction 7 assistance program to address the school construction emergency 8 resulting from the fire that destroyed the Crestline school in the 9 Evergreen School District.10 Appropriation:11 State Building Construction Account--State . . . . . . $461,615,00012 Common School Construction Account--State . . . . . . . $71,328,00013 Common School Construction Account--Federal . . . . . . $1,500,00014 Subtotal Appropriation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $534,443,00015 Prior Biennia (Expenditures) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$016 Future Biennia (Projected Costs) . . . . . . . . . . $3,022,299,00017 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,556,742,000
18 NEW SECTION. Sec. 10. (1) Allotments for appropriations in this19 act shall be provided in accordance with the capital project review20 requirements adopted by the office of financial management and in21 compliance with RCW 43.88.110. Projects that will be employing22 alternative public works construction procedures under chapter 39.1023 RCW are subject to the allotment procedures defined in this section and24 RCW 43.88.110.25 (2) Each project is defined as proposed in the legislative budget26 notes or in the governor's budget document.27 (3) The office of financial management and the office of the28 superintendent of public instruction must expedite the allotment and29 contracting process for projects funded in these appropriations that30 are ready to begin and meet all other requirements.
31 NEW SECTION. Sec. 11. State agencies, including institutions of32 higher education, shall allot and report full-time equivalent staff for33 capital projects in a manner comparable to staff reporting for34 operating expenditures.
SSB 5445 p. 6
1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 12. The amounts shown under the headings "Prior 2 Biennia," "Future Biennia," and "Total" in this act are for 3 informational purposes only and do not constitute legislative approval 4 of these amounts. "Prior biennia" typically refers to the immediate 5 prior biennium for reappropriations, but may refer to multiple biennia 6 in the case of specific projects. A "future biennia" amount is an 7 estimate of what may be appropriated for the project or program in the 8 2015-2017 biennium and the following three biennia; an amount of zero 9 does not necessarily constitute legislative intent to not provide10 funding for the project or program in the future.
11 NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. RCW 43.88.031 requires the disclosure of12 the estimated debt service costs associated with new capital bond13 appropriations. The estimated debt service costs for the14 appropriations contained in this act are seven million five hundred15 thousand dollars for the 2013-2015 biennium, forty-eight million16 dollars for the 2015-2017 biennium, and sixty-eight million dollars for17 the 2017-2019 biennium and each biennium thereafter until the bonds are18 retired, for a total estimated debt service costs of eight hundred19 fifty-five million dollars.
20 NEW SECTION. Sec. 14. If any provision of this act or its21 application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the22 remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other23 persons or circumstances is not affected.
24 NEW SECTION. Sec. 15. This act is necessary for the immediate25 preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the26 state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect27 immediately.
