By Kathy Barks Hoffman/Bridge Magazine contributor
Two years from now, hundreds of thousands of Michigan students will be expected to go online to take computerized statewide math, language arts and other standardized tests that now are conducted with paper and pencils.
The benefits include quicker results for school districts, tests that more accurately track what individual students know and longer test times for students who need them.
Yet, even as the demands of the computer age grow, many school districts are woefully behind the curve when it comes to having the technology in place they’ll need to conduct the tests.
Juggling a mix of aging computers, frail networks, limited bandwidth and stripped-down information technology staffs with few of the resources available to their counterparts in the private sector, many school districts will have to make major technology investments if they’re going to be ready for students to take the mandatory tests online by spring 2015.
Lawmakers set aside $50 million in the 2012-13 school aid budget for school districts, intermediate districts and charter schools that participate in a Michigan Department of Education technology readiness survey and successfully apply for competitive grants to develop or upgrade their technology infrastructure. Districts must respond to the survey by today. The department recently began taking grant requests and will start handing out money in January.
As of Nov. 13, 39 percent of school districts and charter schools statewide had completed the survey. Of those, nearly 1 in 5 reported that they don’t have the necessary network bandwidth to handle large-scale testing. Further, around 10 percent of the computers in these districts lack enough memory to run the tests.
Proposed changes to state loan program could limit schools’ ability to buy tech
Districts that link up with other districts or their intermediate school districts to jointly purchase equipment or collaborate on services to become “test ready” stand a good chance of getting some money, as do districts that increase educators’ ability to plan and implement online assessments and help students learn “any time, any place, any way, any pace,” a goal of Gov. Rick Snyder. No school district will be awarded more than $2 million.
Yet even if most grants are for far smaller amounts, it’s unlikely that more than around 75 of the state’s roughly 550 school districts and charter schools will get any money. That has school administrators worried.
“No one’s looking at $50 million and saying that’s a bad idea,” says Don Wotruba, deputy director of government relations for the Michigan Association of School Boards. “But all of the costs that go with that technology aren’t addressed, at least in a proper way.”
Snyder’s chief strategist, William Rustem, says the administration is aware that many districts need to make changes to prepare for online testing.
“I don’t know if the $50 million solves the problem. But I do know it gets us a long way down the road,” Rustem says. “It’s not as if the state is standing back and saying, `You take care of this.’”
Wendy Zdeb-Roper, a former Rochester High School principal who’s now executive director of the Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals, says most school administrators support the idea of online testing, especially since they can get the results sooner than with paper tests and make adjustments more quickly to improve student learning. But they’re also wary of having to implement yet another state mandate at a time when per-pupil state funding remains tight.
Wotruba notes that it’s not just about buying more computers, but about having enough money to cover the costs of insuring them or replacing the ones that break, as well as the salaries of the technicians who keep the network and computers humming.
“Those are the people we laid off because we tried to keep our teachers” when funding got tight, Wotruba says.
National trend toward more testing
As part of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, Michigan is one of 31 states drafting tests that cover more subjects grade-to-grade than the current high school Michigan Merit Exam or the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) tests taken by elementary and middle school students.
School districts still will be able to use paper tests through the 2017-18 school year, if they can’t meet the deadline. But the pressure’s on to move to the online tests because they’ll allow individual students’ progress to be measured year to year, a key component of Snyder’s plan to eventually tie state funding and teacher evaluations to whether each student learns a year’s worth material each school year.
According to the Gongwer News Service, the consortium program would add math and reading tests for grades 8 through 11 to the tests already conducted from grades 3 through 7, and add the writing component to tests administered in grades 3 through 11. The state also is developing reading, math and writing assessments that could be used for students in kindergarten through grade 2, as well as assessments for science and social studies curriculum taught in grades 3 through 12.
Testifying in July to a bipartisan education reform group in the House of Representatives, the director of the Education Department’s Bureau of Assessment and Accountability, Joseph Martineau, said many districts don’t have the information technology structure in place to support moving all their students off the paper tests at one time.
Wotruba says he knows of many school districts that will have a difficult time getting all their students enough computer time to take the tests, even if districts are allowed to stretch the testing period over weeks or months. And having enough computers is just one part of the equation.
“I need the broadband width, I need the wireless speed for that many kids to take the test at once,” he said. “I think (school districts) are far from ready to move the vast majority of kids to online assessment.”
Rustem says the grants are intended to help school districts look for ways to forge partnerships with each other, their intermediate school districts or the state that will make it easier to upgrade their technology and administer the tests.
“Technology gives us a way to track not only individual (progress) but … school progress,” Rustem says. “We just have to keep pushing, trying to get there, realizing there’s going to be challenges.”
Kathy Barks Hoffman covered Michigan government and politics for more than two decades as a reporter for the Detroit News, the Lansing State Journal and the Associated Press, where she headed AP’s Lansing Bureau for nearly 17 years. She now works for the Public Affairs Practice of public relations firm Lambert, Edwards & Associates.
By Kathy Barks Hoffman/Bridge Magazine contributor
Michigan school districts are vying for $50 million in state money for technology – the first such investment by the state in about a dozen years.
Yet, at the very same time, school leaders are watching warily as legislation that could make it harder for them to borrow money to make technology investments may get lawmakers’ attention during the “lame duck” session.
Republican lawmakers and the Snyder administration are behind a four-bill package (Senate Bills 770-772 and870) now in the House of Representatives that would make changes to Michigan’s School Bond Loan Fund, which school districts now can tap for help with debt service payments on new buildings or other capital improvements.
The bills passed the Senate last spring, but not without criticism.
In testimony presented to the Senate, Superintendent Nick Ceglarek of Hudsonville Public Schools questioned the constitutionality of the measures and stated:
“(P)assing this legislation puts the state in great risk by greatly limiting the state’s obligation to support school infrastructure across the state.”
School districts can’t sell bonds to cover the costs of computer software, IT staff or insurance on their computers, but they can to cover the costs of computer hardware and networks. Don Wotruba, deputy director of government relations for the Michigan Association of School Boards, says that avenue would narrow just as districts must find ways to make bigger technology investments if the legislation passes.
“The method by which we can borrow to meet that need is either going to be shut off or much more expensive for school districts,” Wotruba says. “It’s illogical to me.”
Under the current law, districts can roll over their debt by issuing new bonds — even if they haven’t yet paid off all previous loans. Treasury officials say some districts have piled up so much debt they’ll be hard-pressed to ever pay it all off.
The program is capped at $1.5 billion. As of June 30, 131 school districts had $1.44 billion in outstanding loans covered by the statewide program. A document prepared for the Michigan School Business Officials this fall listed the Chippewa Valley Schools in Macomb County as having the single largest outstanding balance in the program, owing more than $143 million to the state. The Detroit Public Schools was a distant second at $76 million.
A Senate Fiscal Agency analysis on the program noted that it allows school districts to impose a lower millage rate on local taxpayers than their bond loads would otherwise dictate by transferring costs to the state.
“Although the State eventually will be repaid with interest, the State bears significant current and future costs. Local taxpayers have lower millage rates than would otherwise be possible; however, their debt millage is levied for a longer time and the loans increase the interest cost paid for a given project,” the analysis reports.
The state covers its end with dollars from the School Aid Fund – and the end is rising. For the fiscal 2012 year, the state assigned about $94 million. That amount rose to $120 million for the current year. Twenty-five million dollars is the equivalent of annual per-pupil grants for 3,623 students, at the minimum $6,900 level.
And by fiscal 2022, the Treasury Department projects a need for $200 million – if changes to the program aren’t made.
The legislation would move the cap to $1.8 billion on the amount of outstanding loans, which could mean no more pre-qualified loans would be approved once the cap is reached – possibly as early as fall 2014.
School districts could set a later repayment date for their loans than what the state sets only if they agree to ask local residents to pay more in property taxes – although the millage couldn’t exceed 13 mills. Residents also might see their taxes rise each year since millage levels would have to be recalculated annually under the bills.
“Without the changes specified in the bills, the School Aid Fund’s commitment to pay off loans would double by 2020,” Gov. Rick Snyder’s office stated. “The proposed changes would save the state approximately $1.5 billion over the next 20 years. These reforms are in line with the hard work the state has already done to bring down long term liabilities. Capping the state’s subsidy on the school loan program, coupled with the reforms made to put the school retirement system back on solid ground, provides a win for our school systems, our children and their education.”
Kathy Barks Hoffman covered Michigan government and politics for more than two decades as a reporter for the Detroit News, the Lansing State Journal and the Associated Press, where she headed AP’s Lansing Bureau for nearly 17 years. She now works for the Public Affairs Practice of public relations firm Lambert, Edwards & Associates.
By Pat Shellenbarger/Bridge Magazine contributor
In the final weeks of the legislative year, the Snyder administration is pressing ahead with a plan to cut a tax on business equipment by attempting to appease two groups: local governments that count on that money to pay for services, and business groups that claim the levy is a job killer.
With a set of Senate-passed bills languishing in a House committee, Lt. Gov. Brian Calley, House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, and Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville, R-Monroe, on Tuesday released details of a modified plan they hope will satisfy both sides. The new plan would phase out the personal property tax for manufacturers over 10 years while reimbursing school districts, cities, townships and counties with a portion of the state’s use tax, which is similar to the sales tax, but is assessed only on out-of-state purchases. Changing the operation of the use tax would require a statewide vote.
“This is a fiscally responsible strategy that helps to lay the groundwork for a more prosperous future,” Calley said in a press release. “It’s an excellent compromise that balances the tax-relief needs of job providers with the revenue needs of our communities and schools.”
Local government officials, however, were not yet embracing the revised plan. The Michigan Municipal League, which represents local governments, has not taken a stand on the proposed changes, said Samantha Harkins, the League’s director of state affairs.
“I would say the lieutenant governor has listened to our concerns and has made changes addressing those concerns,” she said, but she added that the administration has not yet provided a formula showing how much money local governments will be reimbursed. “Our position all along has been that we need guaranteed replacement,” she said.
The personal property tax is assessed on business equipment, such as computers, office furnishings and industrial machines, with all revenue going to local schools and governments.
For some units, that tax produces only a small percentage of their total revenue. For others, particularly in heavily industrialized areas, it is a significant source of money.
Neither business owners nor local government leaders are especially fond of the personal property tax. Business groups claim it discourages job growth; local government leaders say it is difficult to collect.
Money from the personal property tax goes to both local governments and the state.
A recent survey by the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan found that 74 percent of local leaders favor repealing the personal property tax use tax — if they can be guaranteed the state will replace the money. The survey also found that 67 percent of local government officials don’t trust the state to keep its promise to fully replace the lost revenue.
The Republican-controlled Senate last May passed a package of bills (Senate Bills 1065-1072) to repeal the personal property tax for most businesses. Backers of those bills said the state would reimburse the schools and local governments with money from expiring business tax credits. Opponents, noting a history of broken promises, do not trust future Legislatures to appropriate the money each year.
An analysis of the Senate bills by the Senate Fiscal Agency gave credence to the skeptics. The agency, the Senate’s nonpartisan research arm, questioned whether the money from expiring tax credits “would be sufficient to fund reimbursements at the level suggested by the bill.” Most local units would not receive any reimbursement under the Senate bills, according to the analysis, and even those that qualified for payments “could experience substantial revenue losses.”
And some business leaders were concerned about a “poison pill” provision inserted in the Senate bills at the last minute that would re-impose the personal property tax if the state failed to keep its promise to reimburse the local units.
Such opposition sent the Snyder administration back to the drawing board. The revised plan would designate about 1 cent to 1.5 cents of the state’s 6 cent use tax to replace revenue from the personal property tax. The new plan would create a “metropolitan authority” appointed by the governor to distribute the money, thus avoiding an annual appropriation from the Legislature.
According to the House Fiscal Agency, the state should raise about $1.25 billion with the use tax this year, with $415 million going to the School Aid Fund and the rest into the state’s general fund.
A 1.5 cent diversion of the use tax would equal about $300 million. State accounts also would have to absorb the loss of its share of the PPT funds. The SFA analysis of the original bills pegged the full annual loss at $120 million.
A Snyder spokesman said the state’s loss would be made up from revenue from expiring state business tax credits such as those granted to boost the electric auto battery industry, though there’s some question about how much the state will get from the end of those credits.
Asked what would happen if voters failed to approve the diversion of the use tax to cover the local governments, the spokesman noted, “Then you lose the guaranteed funding.”
New plan creates reimbursement hierarchy
Under Calley’s new approach, local governments that get less than 2.5 percent of their total property tax collections from the personal property tax would receive no reimbursement. Those that get 2.5 percent or more of their property tax collections from the personal property tax would be reimbursed for at least 80 percent of the lost revenue. Those local units would be allowed to impose an “essential services assessment” on businesses to make up for the money that would have gone for police, fire and ambulance services.
The state School Aid Fund would be fully reimbursed, the administration said, and school debts would be covered 100 percent.
Beginning in 2014, industrial and commercial businesses with personal property valued at less than $40,000 would be exempt from paying any personal property tax. The tax on industrial personal property would continue to be phased out over the next eight years. Utilities, however, would still pay the levy.
Mike Johnston, the Michigan Manufacturers Association’s vice president for government affairs, expressed support for the “direction” of the proposed changes.
“Our goal is to eliminate the personal property tax and make us competitive,” he said. “Having said that, we are happy to see the local governments’ concerns addressed. We are consumers of local services.”
Harkin, of the Michigan Municipal League, was concerned that designating a portion of the use tax for local governments and schools will require a statewide vote, which could be defeated.
“That’s a question we have,” she said. “If there is a statewide vote, what happens if the vote fails? That makes us very nervous.”
She also questioned the urgency of rushing the bills through the lame duck session without giving enough thought to the possible impact on local governments.
“Doing something in the ‘lame-duck’ Legislature makes me think we might be facing our own fiscal cliff in Michigan,” she said.
Pat Shellenbarger is a freelance writer based in West Michigan. He previously was a reporter and editor at the Detroit News, the St. Petersburg Times and the Grand Rapids Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.