The Center for Michigan’s town hall meeting in East Lansing Wednesday was jam-packed with citizens, business people and educators eager to see the issues of children and schools go to the top of the agenda for the 2010 statewide elections.
Click here for a quick guide to the big issues.
In case you missed it, here are five key takeaways from Wednesday’s meeting:
MELTON MAKES NEWS ON SCHOOL FINANCING: State Rep. Tim Melton, D-Auburn Hills, offered the morning’s most impassioned presentation. The chair of the school finance committee in the House waged a multi-fronted battle. “The burden we’re putting on the future is unsustainable,” he said, pointing at the costs of educator health care and pensions which are increasinly dominating school budget talks. “Who will be brave enough to take on the gorilla in the room?” he asked, pointing a finger at teacher unions. Simultaneously, he called it “ridiculous” for Senate Republicans to have signed no-tax pledges at a time when dozens of Michigan school districts are on the edge of the “Kalkaska option” of shutting their doors and shortening their school years. Visibly frustrated at the inability of the Legislature to pass significant policy, Melton said he may push his colleagues to approve a ballot measure in August that would, in effect, ask voters to choose between deep cuts to schools or higher taxes. Click for coverage from the Detroit News and Detroit Free Press
GROWING SUPPORT FOR PRE-K: Less than a year after the Michigan Senate proposed zeroing out funding for state pre-school programs, advocates may be gaining ground in their battle to increase public awareness of the return on investment in early childhood. Wednesday’s crowd digested economic studies and expert testimony suggesting pre-school offers a high return on investment. Then, when asked where Michigan should put a fictional $100 million more per year in funding, the crowd chose pre-K over K-12, community colleges, and universities.
IN AN EDUCATION-FRIENDLY CROWD, BENNIES GET SCRUTINY: Wednesday’s crowd was generally supportive of future increases in school funding and was willing to raise taxes to provide that funding. But in terms of school personnel changes, insta-polling of the crowd showed highest support for cuts to educator health care and benefits (48 percent) with less support for educator pay for performance (21 percent), reprioritizing school budgets to provide more money for teacher pay and in-classroom expenses (19 percent), and providing nationally competitive pay and benefits to attract the best educators (12 percent).
ONGOING PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE DEBATE: Representative Melton said he expected local school districts to adopt new pay-for-performance measures for educators in their next labor negotiations. But American Federation of Teachers-Michigan President David Hecker and Michigan Education Association President Iris Salters cast doubt over pay-for-performance as the latest knee-jerk fad in education. They said they’d not seen any research proving that pay-for-performance improves teaching or student learning. And, state schools superintendent Mike Flanagan told the crowd that the Legislature hadn’t yet passed what he views as the most-effective mechanism which, in his mind, is to offer performance-based incentives for the full team of educators at individual schools rather than individual educators.
THE FACE OF COLLEGE COSTS: Michigan State University President Lou Anna K. Simon, University of Michigan Vice President Cynthia Wilbanks, and Kalamazoo Valley Community College President Marilyn Schlack offered considerable evidence of how campuses are cutting costs while facing never-ending cuts in state financing, spurring prosperity through research and technology, and straining to handle larger numbers of students who need remedial education. Then Grand Valley University student Nikki Searle, who just lost a Michigan Promise scholarship due to budget cuts, made an elegant and simple plea. First she quoted the Michigan Constitution… “… religion, morality and KNOWLEDGE being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, SCHOOLS AND THE MEANS OF EDUCATION SHALL FOREVER BE ENCOURAGED.” Then she outlined for the crowd her costs for one semester…
Tuition: $4,315
Rent: $1,700
Groceries: $100
Textbooks: $235
Total Costs: $6,650
9 Comments
To Phil and everyone at the Center. It is always good to beat the townhall meetings. I may ruffle your feathers with some of me comments but that doesn’t mean I’m not with you in what your are working to accomplish. I truly believe that now is the time to bring forth the ideas that are needed to turn the state around.I really appreciate your hard work in this endeaver.
Our edcuation system has used student report cards as a means of communicating to all affected participants the progress/performance of the students learning. That seems to have proven to be such an effective tool that it has survived all past reforms.
I wonder why with all the desire by Townhall particpants there was no discussion about creating a reporting tool for the progress/performance of the Michigan education system.
The reasons for and the methods used in the student report card scheme are applicable to the Michigan Education system. If you want to improve something, measure it and report results on a regular schedule.
With healthcare cost projected to increase this year by 15.6% and pension benefits increasing from 16.94% to 19.41% and tax revenue down, it is understandable that this system is unsustainable. Foundation allowances have increased 4 out of the last 5 years but all increases are eaten up by these over generous entitlements. Until all stackholders, Mea,and taxpayers come together to find common ground education will continue to spiral downward with layoffs, school closures and larger class sizes. Reforms are needed on BOTH the expence and revenue sides or we will continue to maintain the status quo of this unsustainable system.
It is becoming increasingly popular to portray education retirees as fat cats out of touch with reality. Rep Melton calls the retirement burden unsustainable. A look beneath the surface as to why the retirement fund is now underfunded is revealing. When the retirement fund had an excess, then Gov Engler “borrowed” money from the fund and shifted the responsibility for keeping the fund solvent from the State to local district’s per pupil allocation. As many Districts began to have financial problems they offered Early Retirement Incentives- ERI’s. This added unprojected educators to the retirement pool. Now, to “Help” Districts, the Legislature is contemplating additional retirement incentives to entice 39,00 teachers to retire. These potential early additions to the retirement pool will only further drive-up the cost to Districts. The retirement formula has remained unchanged. What has changed is that there has been a large influx of new retirees that where not expected to enter the system this early. When looking at the retiree benefit problem from this perspective, I am reminded of the words of Pogo: “I have found the enemy and we is them”.
I want to correct and clarify some remarks State Rep. Tim Melton made at the Town Hall when he attempted to portray the MPSRS retirement system as broken or at least unsustainable. Contrary to Rep. Melton’s scenario, ONLY Public School Employees hired after 1990 and who ALSO joined the Member Investment Plan (MIP) can retire with a full pension at age 46 – so…let’s assume as he did in his hypothetical example, that the new teacher is hired at age 22 in 1990 – then buys 5 years of service credit – works for 25 years THEN he/she COULD retire and collect a full pension (at minimum age of 46) – It also should be noted that the current US male life expectancy is 74 ( which makes his example a rare event for that former school employee to live to age 87 – given that life expectancy, it’s more likely that person might collect a pension for about 27 years – but not rather unlikely for the 40 years that Rep. Melton described. All Public School employees NOT in the MIP cannot retire with a full pension until age 55 assuming 30 years of service or 60 with at least 10 years of service. Rep. Melton’s hypothetical had limited validity.
Proposal A was flawed from the begining. Its assumptions were based on constant economic growth, which never happens especially in an industrial state. Children are our future and I want the best teacher I can find for all children. Just like we want the best doctor when we are sick. If schools are to continue to attract the best and brightest, competitve pay and benefits must be in the formula. Good teachers don’t just work a 40 hour week. Nor is the underfunding of their modest pension plan their fault, a 2008 Wall St. melt down is the biggest problem. Health Care is another issue and our local Bad Axe District Teachers just dropped MESSA for lower cost coverage, so yes some teachers understand kids come first.
Dedicated teachers don’t work 40 hour weeks, they work for hours grading papers, planning curriculm and being a person who cares for a child they have in their classroom when no one else is there to care for them.
A dedicated teacher does what is best for their classroom , no matter how many new unfunded programs come from Lansing or Washigton. MEAP, No Child Left Behind,Algebra II graduation requirements when they still can’t read, to name just a few wastefull programs.
So it is time for those in a leadership role to make bold long term changes that will correct the major flaws caused by Proposal A. Increased taxes and a reduction in unfunded education mamdates must occur now. That is what legislators were elected to do. Not throw it back into the lap of the voter.
What’s to worry Mr or Mrs legislator after 6 years you have your pension and benefits anyway so stick you neck out and solve the problem. I for one am not afraid of paying my fair share to help our children become the best they can be.
It should be noted that the retirement system uses a formula for computing retirement benefits. This means that full retirement is not the same for all. For example “full retirement” for a teacher with 30 years of experience is equal to 45% of the top 3 consecutive years of pay… let’s say it’s $60,000…so that person’s retirement would be $27000 annually for retirement. But a teacher with say 40 years of experience would get 60% of the top 3 consecutive years of pay or $36000.
And I would like to say that as a teacher with 40 years of experience, I feel as if I am being forced to retire under all of the proposals that are out there. It should not be assumed that as a 40 year veteran I am burned out and no longer able to do my job. There are teachers in my district with only 15 years of experience that make as much as I do. “The powers that be” in Lansing want to force me to retire so I can be replaced by a lower paid teacher. But what does my school lose when I retire? Their lead elementary science teacher, the person who is the expert at understanding the MEAP data, an instructional leader, a member of the school improvement committee, a teacher who has knowledge and concern for the community and its families, but most of all a teacher who already knows how to teach and does a good job of it.
Phil and all, a great session regarding educating our youth and college students. I was disappointed that no issue statements focused on or that no one spoke about the great need for adult core competency development. When state funding fell from a one time high of over $300M to just $22M, an educational crisis was created and still exists. We heard a lot regarding educating our youth in risk. Most of these youth come from homes with low adult literacy skills. How can a parent read to their children when they cannot read themselves?
I agree with the teacher with 40 years. Also, I am 60 years old and finishing my 40th year. I saw when past Govenor Engler weakened medical insurance for retirees. I now pay a great deal for my many prescriptions because our Port Huron Education Association agreed to to a lesser MESSA plan. We always said in previous contract years that we were giving up fair pay in order to keep our benefits. Most people understand that teachers are not overpaid. I too have been a good teacher for many years, and just like “senior” teachers, the younger teachers have both effective and unaffective teachers. We do sympathize with those being laid off, which has happened several times in the last 40 years.
Lowering pay and benefits will not attract the best and brightest in the future. In the past, many teachers have chosen teaching because of a love for the profession rather than a job paying more. However, to take even more away will drive graduates to higher-paying jobs.
I will not be eligible for social security for two years. I am single, so the only way I would feel I could retire early if the formula % incentive was included in the plan.