Let's Go Old School.  

The O'Jays said it best back in the early-1970s with this big hit (although the song gets a little dark).  The state is flush with "Money, Money, Money."  The budget forecast released today shows a projected surplus of $7.7 billion.  The primary engine in the growth of the projected surplus is rapid growth in tax receipts.  They are up more than $5 billion since the post-session forecast.  We had been hearing all summer that tax collections across all categories (income, corporate, and sales) were rising, but I'm guessing the only people not surprised by the magnitude of the increase are those mapping the data in the Minnesota Department of Revenue and Minnesota Management and Budget.  The state also spent $364 million less than anticipated, with much of the savings being realized through lower than expected pupil numbers attending Minnesota K-12 schools.  Of the $7.7 billion, it is estimated that $3.1 billion is one-time money and $4.3 billion is on-going.

It's too early to determine what the actual battlelines between the two legislative bodies and the Governor will look like, but the Senate will likely push for considerable and on-going tax cuts while the House and Governor will likely present a mixed package that will include both tax cuts and additional spending.  It's worth pointing out that the budget target for the final E-12 omnibus bill that passed last session was around $200 million less than what the Governor had proposed and the House had passed.  With the formula taking center stage in the final bill, funding to help keep the special education cross-subsidy where it is and reducing the cross-subsidy for English Language Learners was not included and I wouldn't be surprised if those two items resurface during the 2022 session.

There may also be a chance for increased equalization for school levies.  The Governor proposed around $90 million of increased equalization for the local option, operating referendum, and debt service levies in his 2021 budget recommendations.  In addition, the Senate proposed about $25 million for increased equalization of the operating referendum.  As we've seen in recent news reports, property taxes have been rising, so there may be an appetite for education-related property tax relief to cushion rising residential and commercial property taxes.  I have been working with legislative staff on a bill that would provide considerable property tax relief by increasing equalizing factors for a number of school-related levies (principally those addressed by the Governor last session and the Senate in terms of the operating levy).  Sometimes ideas and ability to implement those ideas due to resource availability come together and while increased equalization would have budget tails extending into the next biennium, the optimism expressed in this budget forecast indicates resources would likely be there.

Below is Powerpoint delivered this morning by MMB.

Management and Budget November Forecast Presentation

We started off with the O'Jays and we'll close out with Buddy Guy and the video of another money-related song, the classic oft-recorded "Money,"

Minnesota Council on Economic Education Speakers Series Kicks Off Next Thursday.  Our good friends at the Minnesota Council on Economic Education are kicking off their speaker series for this program year with a presentation by Minnesota State Economist Dr. Laura Kalimbokodis next Thursday, December 9.  With the state budget forecast still fresh in everyone's mind, Dr. Kalimbokodis will provide solid insight as to how the Minnesota economy has performed during the pandemic and what may lie ahead.  The program begins at 4:00 PM and runs until 5:00.  The event is free and you can register using the link provided below.  I urge everyone to take advantage of this opportunity.  This is another example of the great opportunities to learn more about economic issues provided by the Minnesota Council on Economic Education.

Registration Link for Dr. Laura Kalimbokidis Presentation to MCEE

Election Wrap-Up.  It's been a week and I have pored through the election results, both for school levies and school board elections.  There weren't a lot of school board elections this fall as most districts have moved toward even-year, but given how school board meetings have generated considerable interest over the past year on issues related to school reopening and curricular matters, these elections were watched very closely.  There was not a lot of turnover in school boards this fall, as candidates critical of districts on the aforementioned issues of school reopening and curriculum often came close, but rarely won seats on the Minnesota school boards holding elections.  It is always difficult to tell what will happen in elections that do not coincide with state and national elections as turnout is often much lower, but with a few notable exceptions, candidates more closely allied with current district policies prevailed.  That said, the energy coming from new candidates certainly affected the discourse of the elections and the success that was enjoyed may well spill over into future elections.  It's too early to make a firm prediction, but it is my guess (CAUTION:  I made the same guess last year) that while there may be COVID spikes that will disrupt instruction in some districts, that will become increasingly isolated and school opening a year from now will look very close to what was once considered traditional (and will be traditional once again).

The debate over curriculum will likely continue, especially given the results of the Virginia Governor's race.  Former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives is often credited with the saying "All politics is local" whether he actually said it or not (the saying likely predates his use of the phrase), but increasingly politics is taking on a more national tone with both major parties generally promoting similar messages across the country.  Education has tended to be an issue that while having national importance (see Goals 2000, No Child Left Behind, etc.), results of local school board elections usually hinged solely on questions of policy developed and implemented at the local level.  The message surrounding education will likely resonate in national, state, and local elections in 2022 with heavy debate revolving around issues pertaining to curriculum.

Ballot questions fared well across the state for the most part, with the notable exception of SEE districts, which organizationally lagged behind the statewide passage percentage.  There were 52 operating levy questions put before voters, with 36 passing for a success rate of 69%.  Among SEE districts, eight districts went out for operating levies and only 3 prevailed (New London-Spicer split, but there larger ballot question passed).  On the debt service side of the equation, there were 49 questions, with 28 passing for a rate of 57%.  Eight SEE districts went out for debt service bonds or a capital levy and 4 were successful, again below the statewide passage rate.

The lower success rate for SEE districts once again stresses the need for greater levels of equalization, both for the operating levy and for debt service.  The capital projects levy should also be equalized.  The voters in SEE districts are supportive of their schools, but as we saw once again last week, the fact that low property wealth districts are at a disadvantage when going before the voters to seek additional funds.  SEE will be assembling and promoting a comprehensive legislative proposal during the 2022 legislative session to bring greater tax fairness to levy questions.  Stay tuned on that.

Pandemic Pupil Loss Revenue Adjustment Finalized.  Earlier this summer, Governor Walz announced that $29 million in Federal COVID relief revenue would be distributed to school districts throughout the state to partially address the drop in student counts during the 2020-2021 school year.  The count in terms of student loss has finally been verified and the revenue will be distributed through an informal adjustment in the declining pupil formula.

This is certainly a funding boost and it looked at several junctures that a funding adjustment wouldn't take place.  Bills to provide some adjustment were introduced during the special sessions that took place in the fall of 2020 and language was included in several bills--including the Governor's "summer" bill--discussed during the regular session.  As the session progressed, more attention was paid to what I would term "forward" funding that was largely divorced from the changes in attendance and service delivery resulting from the the pandemic.  

It's important to remember that the three Federal aid packages passed since the onset of the pandemic did provide considerable financial support to school districts, but as has been shown, the distribution of that revenue was very uneven throughout the state and in more than a few instances did not cover the additional costs incurred by districts as they reacted to changing circumstances.  The link below shows what each district will receive as a result of the Governor's action.

MDE Federal Relief Page (Scroll Down to Allocation for Enrollment Loss Support--10/4/21 under Federal Relief Funding Resources Subheading in Bold)

This adjustment does look backward and it is a needed first step.  The second necessary step is to mitigate the loss in compensatory revenue resulting from parents not filling out the required forms to qualify for free- or reduced-price lunch.  This is largely due to meals being made free for all students.  Because no paperwork was required, it was not submitted and, as a result, the student count necessary to establish a count for the calculation of districts' compensatory revenue was greatly reduced.  This has caused problems statewide and if the Legislature does return to funding discussions in 2022, this is one area that deserves considerable attention.

October is National Economics Education Month.  It has become increasingly important for students to understand how the American and international economies work.  Our good friends at the Minnesota Council on Economic Education (MCEE) provide quality professional development opportunities for K-12 teachers to help teachers implement the state's eocnomic and personal finance learning standards.  These standards are embedded beginning in elementary school and so few teachers have an extensive background in economics.  MCEE provides a variety of teacher-friendly programs at low or no cost to help teachers deliver the standards with confidence and fidelity.  In addition, MCEE sponsors student competitions.  For more information, follow the link below.

Minnesota Council on Economic Education

More Detail on Governor's COVID-19 Education Relief Package.  I wrote briefly last week about how the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) will be distributing $132 million in COVID-19 relief funds that are available to the state through the American Relief Plan (ARP) that was passed at the Federal level in March.  Here are the major funding areas of the MDE plan with the dollar amounts attached to each program within each funding area.

Learning Recovery--$66 million

There are no specific programs mentioned in this funding category, but the plan states that the funds will go directly to public schools to support historically underserved students (HUS) with particular emphasis on students receiving special education services.  Funding from this category may mesh with the special education recovery language that was passed by the Legislature as part of the omnibus education finance and policy bill.  Districts receiving revenue must select evidenced-based strategies from the MDE-identified list in addressing student needs and aligned to the MDE priority list for learning recovery referenced here,  Schools are encouraged to engage community-based partnerships in meeting student needs.

After School Programs--$13.2 million

MDE will allocate funds to Ignite Afterschool to provide grants to community organizations and culturally-specific community organizations to deliver evidence-based after school programming.  

Summer Enrichment--$13.2 million

MDE will allocate funds for grant distribution with 50% of the funds going to community organizations and 50% going to culturally-specific community organizations.

School Support--$26 million

• $5 million for Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS)*
• $5 million for Full Service Community Schools*
• $4 million dedicated to expanding rigorous coursework for underserved students*
• $3 million for trauma-informed/anti-bias instructional practices training.*
• $3 million for non-exclusionary discipline training*
• $2 million for Life Skills/Transition Programs
• $2 million for teacher mentoring for new staff
• $1.5 million for ParentChild+ and Reach Out and Read.
• $500,000 Tribal/State Relations Training for public school leaders.

*Included in some form in the Governor's original budget recommendations but either not passed or funded at the level recommended by the Governor in the omnibus education funding and policy bill.

State Support--$13.6 million

• $6 million to prioritize data disaggregation
• $2 million to provide for a public engagement division in MDE that will support public school efforts to provide translated materials for families
• $2 million to provide non-grant administrative related supports attributable to needs arising from COVID

I have not accounted for all of the revenue here and more details will be forthcoming from MDE in the month ahead.  I know that they are planning a set of webinars and while those should be well-publicized by MDE, I will certainly follow up with notice on the blog.

The curtain has come down on the legislative session, but there's a lot to explain regarding the omnibus education funding and policy bill and the Governor's most recent initiative related to distribution of the ARP funds.  Feel free to contact me with questions or comments.

Governor Announces COVID-Relief Package.  On the same day that the Governor signed, sealed, and delivered the omnibus education funding and policy bill, he also released his plan for disbursing nearly $132 million in Federal aid that was passed through to the state as part of the American Rescue Plan, the third (and my guess final) Federal response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  As a refresher, the $132 million is the 9.5% of the initial state allocation that remains after 90% of the revenue was distributed to school districts based on their Title I numbers.  The Minnesota Department of Education retains 0.5% of the allotment to administer the program as outlined by Federal law.

The breakdown of the Governor's plan (this isn't a proposal, because the revenue is at his disposal--that rhymes!):

1. $66 million will be distributed to public schools to support students using evidence-based strategies. 
2. $13.2 million will be dedicated to Ignite Afterschool to provide grants for evidence-based after-school programs.  50% of the funds must go to community-based programs.
3. $13.2 million will be dedicated to summer enrichment allocated through grants with 50% going to community-based programs.
4. $26 million will go a variety of grant programs including full-service community schools, expansion of rigorous coursework, training for non-exclusionary discipline strategies, funding for Life Skills/Transition programs for students receiving special education, and other initiatives.
5. $13.6 million will be dedicated to building and reinforcing systems and structures with the Minnesota Department of Education to better support students, families, and educators.

It is a very ambitious program and dovetails with the overall general support that school districts received in the omnibus education funding and policy bill.  The thing that jumps out at me is that many of the Governor's initiatives that fell by the wayside during the negotiations to construct the final omnibus education funding and policy bill will find their way to students through this effort.  It appears that something akin to Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS), which promotes the use of evidence-based strategies to meet student needs in a comprehensive manner will be part of this plan.

Here is a link to the press released annoucing the plan.  There are links at the bottom of the release for further information.

Governor Walz Announces $132 Million in Federal American Rescue Plan Education Funds to Support Student Recovery from COVID-19 and Promote Success for Years to Come

 Education Bill Passes 65-0 on the Senate Floor.  I thought I would start things off with something upbeat to commemorate the occasion and I settled on ELO's Mr. Blue Sky.  The clouds that threatened the early days of the 2021 legislative session have vanished and a strong education bill has been passed and a government shutdown has been avoided (just in the nick of time).  While the overall budget target for the E-12 bill is not appreciably larger than recent history (especially when inflation is factored into the equation), if someone would have told me when the Legislature kicked off the session on January 5 that the E-12 budget target for this biennium would be $546 million, I would have definitely taken the under on a bet.  But the February budget forecast was up dramatically and that provided legislators in both bodies with the resources they needed to make their legislative statements.  

The initial targets for the House and Governor were higher on the spending side and were somewhat reliant on the passage of tax increases.  Across the partisan street, the Senate concentrated more on tax relief and, as a result, had much lower spending targets.  As has happened in the recent past in Minnesota's divided Legislature, this produced a collision where the sides met near the middle with lower spending targets and no tax increases.

The centerpiece of the omnibus education bill is clearly the 2.45%/2% increases in the basic formula for the next biennium.  As I have written before, when the budget target of $525 million was initially set (subsequently raised to $546 million), I didn't think there was any way that the 2%/2% initiative that a vast majority of education lobbying groups set out as their goal would be possible.  I assumed (and remember what people say about what assuming makes one) that the final bill would look almost identical to what was agreed upon in 2019, when the special education cross-subsidy hold-harmless was fully funded and the voluntary pre-kindergarten slots were protected.  This year, they opted to put money on the formula instead of funneling it toward maintaining the level of the special education cross-subsidy at its current level, which was standard practice prior to a couple of biennia ago.  Prior to that, putting money on the formula was the automatic default position and this bill returns to that approach.  There will be distributional effects as districts with special education cross-subsidies well above the state average would benefit from state action to hold them where they are instead of putting dollars on the formula.  Districts with lower cross-subsidies obviously benefit from the approach that this bill takes.

It is similar in the case of the 4,000 voluntary pre-kindergarten program slots that the bill protects.  If a district does not participate in this program, the formula would have obviously been of greater benefit, but in the absence of this funding initiative, the pre-kindergarten programs in participating districts may have disappearned entirely.  There is an impression that all 4,000 of these slots are in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and a few inner-ring suburbs.  That isn't the case as a number of districts well outside the metropolitan area are reliant on this funding.

Those are the largest moving parts in the bill and while neither side got all that they wanted, that is the nature of negotiations and the final bill is a very good piece of work.

A special session was probably unavoidable this year given the nature, timing, and amount of the Federal relief packages and trying to gauge the effects of fourteen months of reaction to COVID-19.  As a long time observor of the process, I think those were the major complications as opposed to other explanations that have arisen regarding how the legislative machinery has changed over time.  My guess is we'll know more next year when session kicks in again on January 31, 2022, and will likely run all the way to the constitutionally-mandated end date of May 23, 2022.  It will be an election year with a gubernatorial race and the entire legislature running in newly-drawn legislative districts.  Should be fun . . . maybe.

So in closing, as the current comes down on the 2021 special session, I think Kurt Vonnegut wrote it first and Nick Lowe sang it about a decade later:  So it goes.

Several Steps Closer.  The omnibus education funding and policy bill has been moving briskly through the process after the agreement was annouced last week.  HF 2/SF 23 was heard in the House Ways and Means Committee last Wednesday and the House Education Finance Committee held an informational hearing on the agreement on Friday morning.  The full House passed the bill by an overwhelming vote of 105-20 on Saturday after several hours of debate which featured the rejection of a number of amendments.  The amendment that produced the most rhetoric was offered by Representative Glenn Gruenhagen that would have created opportunity scholarships (basically vouchers) for students in the Minneapolis and St. Paul school districts.  Most of the amendments that went to a roll call were defeated on straight party-line votes.  I was a bit surprised by the margin of final passage, but it is important to remember that a lot of the resistance to the bill as it left the House during the regular session revolved around what the minority caucus labelled a plethora of mandates on local school districts.  Those mandates were almost completely eliminated and the vast majority of the new money for school districts will go out on the general education basic formula, which really removed most objections.

The Senate heard the companion file--SF 23--last Thursday and will take up the bill on the Senate floor tomorrow (Monday).  I surmise that the bill will pass with ease and will head to the Governor shortly thereafter for his signature.  With that, the eventful legislative season will have come to and end.

I will provide a more in-depth update at some point after the dust finally settles. 

 At Last.  We'll end the day with the late Etta James singing her biggest hit "At Last" to signify the final data run that will accompany the release of the omnibus education funding and policy agreement.  Here is a link to the coveted district-by-district data run that shows the estimated per pupil revenue amounts each district is slated to receive over the coming biennium as a result of the agreement.

So with no futher adieu, here it is:

Omnibus Education Funding and Policy Agreement District-by-District Data Run

 More Documents for Your Review.  Linked below are documents showing the overall budget change, indivdual change items, and levy changes associated with the Omnibus Education Funding and Policy bill.

HF 2 State Aid Change Above Base

HF 2 Individual Change Items

HF 2 Levy Tracking

No district-by-district run as of yet, but I imagine one will be available when the bill for when the bill is discussed on the floor tomorrow.

 Bill Language and Summary Available.  Below are links to HF 2--the E-12 omnibus bill language and summary--that will be discussed this evening in the House Ways and Means Committee.  Note that the bill is only 71 pages this year.  Traditionally, the E-12 omnibus bill runs at least 200 pages and covers a vast array of projects and formulas.  This year's bill is narrowly focused with very little in terms of on-going education funding beyond the basic formula and funding for a variety of programs aimed at increasing the number of teachers of color.  I am sure there will be a spreadsheet and district-by-district runs available soon (perhaps even later today) and I will get those on the blog as soon as I receive them.

2021 Omnibus Education Funding and Policy Bill Language

2021 Omnibus Education Funding and Policy Bill Summary

 

 We have a budget agreement!  About an hour ago, the agreement on the E-12 budget for the coming biennium was released.  I chose a fireworks graphic both as an indication for celebration and also a symbol of what have been fireworks that have likely been part of the process to get to this agreement.

There are still likely language details but here is the budget framework that was released.

• Basic formula increase of 2.45% for 2021-22 and 2% increase for 2022-23.
• $46.5 million to preserve the voluntary pre-kindergarten seats for the next two years.
• $10.45 million over the biennium for special education cross-subsidy reduction.
• $4 million over this biennium and $4 million in the next biennium to reduce the English Language Learner cross-subsidy.
• $280,000 for American Indian Teacher Preparation Grants (funding in on-going).
• $750,000 in this biennium for the Black Men Teach program.
• $400,000 in this biennium for Come Teach in Minnesota Hiring Bonuses (funding is on-going).
• $250,000 in this biennium for Expanded Concurrent Enrollment (funding is on-going).
• $10 million in this biennium for Grow Your Own (funding is on-going).
• $4.508 million in this biennium for Teachers of Color Mentoring and Retention Incentive Grants(funding is on-going).
• $500,000 in this biennium for Teacher Recruitment and Marketing Campaign (funding is on-going).
• $3 million in this biennium for the Sanneh Foundation (one-time money).
• $3 million in this biennium for LETRS grants (one-time money).
• $1.75 million in this biennium for non-exclusionary discipline training with the House language included.
• $300,000 for Children's Museums statewide (one-time money).
• $1 million for Digital Well-Being Grant (one-time money).
• $1.5 million for Girls in Action (one-time money).
• $1 million for Math Corps (one-time money).
• $150,000 for Minnesota Civics Education Coalition (one-time money).
• $1 million for Right Size College Entrance Examination Reimbursement (one-time money).
• $265,000 for Suicide Prevention Teacher Training Grants (one-time money.

There are agreements on language relating to the notification of environmental hazards, anti-lunch shaming, religious observance school absences, special education COVID recovery, limits on students' screen time, and a suspension on the implementation of new learning standards.

It's important to look at this agreement in the context of where the legislative bodies started going into the negotiations during the regular session and where their positions sat in comparison to the Governor's original budget.  The House target was in the low-$700 million range while the Senate's was around $165 million.  The global budget agreement set the budget target at $525 million, which required the House to move away from its original proposal and giving the Senate the opportunity to move up and direct money to its priorities.  The Senate bill had a much narrower focus than the House bill, so in moving upward, it had the relative luxury of putting money on the formula, especially after it became clear that one of Senator Chamberlain's top priorities--Education Savings Accounts for use in private schools--was not going to gain approval from the Governor.  That led the Senate to put nearly all of its on-going resources on the basic formula.  On the other hand, the House had to constrict its spending and a number of programs that were in the House bill fell by the wayside.

There is always a trade-off between the basic formula and the categoricals and that will play out in the distribution of revenue from this legislation.  The Governor and House put $70.1 million for special education cross-subsidy reduction and $13.6 million for the English Language Learner cross-subsidy reduction, but the House faced the challenge of having to reduce expenditures from its initial target and face the reality that as the timeworn adage goes "you can only spend a dollar once."  A dollar spent on the basic formula can't be spent on cross-subsidy reduction.  Setting the basic formula where it ended up absorbed almost all of the on-going money available to the negotiators, which limited what could be done in other areas.  Maintaining the voluntary-preK slots was a House priority that was able to survive in total, while the cross-subsidy efforts were reduced.

I want to make it clear that money on the formula is a good thing and this is a very healthy increase in a year when I thought it was unlikely that we would reach the 2%/2% goal that most of the education lobby advocated for throughout the 2021 session.  In fact, there are bits of eggs on my face from when I told a group of superintendents right after the adjournment of the regular session that there really was no way 2%/2% was possible given the $525 million target.  I made the assumption--wrongly--that the special education cross-subsidy reduction revenue would survive the negotiations in total, so like many Vikings' fans who predict impending Super Bowl glory, I am duly chastened.

The question is always how dollars are distributed.  If you are a district with a unduly large special education cross-subsidy (everyone has a large cross-subsidy), you would have likely preferred the Governor's and House's proposal.  If not, you are likely pleased with the final bill.  The basic formula is usually the default position as the final landing spot for revenue when there are competing visions regarding revenue distribution and that is what clearly came through in this agreement.

There is little in the bill in terms of new mandates.  It appears there will be some language relating to non-exclusionary discipline (along with grants for training money), but I am hesitant to speculate beyond that.

I will link the bill when the language becomes available.

Education Bills Released.  The Senate and House education finance-related committees both released their proposed omnibus education finance and policy bills today.  It is a lot to digest, but here are the highlights.

HF 1065

• 2% increase in the basic formula in each of the next two years with formula linked to inflation going forward ($100 million more than Governor's recommendation).
• $73 million to keep special education cross-subsidy at current levels (Governor's recommendation)
• Maintenance of current voluntary pre-kindergarten slots (Governor's recommendation).
• $10 million for concurrent enrollment ($2 million more than Governor's recommendation.
• Transportation sparsity adjustment of 30% of current transportation cross-subsidy.
• Funding for trauma-informed schools at $6 million per year ($4 million more per year than Governor's recommendation).
• $17 million in FY 2023 and in base for school support personnel ($32 million less than Governor's recommendation).
• Ability for districts to renew existing voter-approved levies at same level by board approval.
• $13 million for paraprofessional training ($13 million above Governor's recommendation).
• $6 million in teacher mentoring grants ($4.5 million over current law and Governor's recommendation).
• No grants for teacher mentoring (Governor recommended $10 million over the biennium).
• $4 million to the Sanneh Foundation (not in Governor's recommendations)
• Minor improvement in equalization of the local option revenue category (Governor's recommendation was for $90 million in improved equalization for the local option revenue, operating referendum, and debt service levy categories.

While there isn't a lot of movement away from the Governor's recommendations, the House moved money out of the proposed equalization and several of the Governor's proposed grant programs toward putting additional revenue on the basic formula and several programs that are high priorities of the House committee (paraprofessional training, trauma-informed schools, Sanneh Foundation, etc.).

SF 960

• No increase in basic formula in either year of the biennium.

• $15 million in transportation sparsity adjustment (70% of difference as opposed to House's 30% and funding in both years of the biennium.
• $60 million of one-time money in the first year of the biennium to all districts on a per pupil basis with limits on districts that received more than $5,000 per pupil from Federal recovery plans.
• $25 million in referendum equalization.
• $16 million in safe schools aid.
• $3 million per year in LETRS (scientific reading staff development) grants..
• $2.5 million in teacher mentoring grants.
• $1.5 million to LiveMore ScreenLess to promote digital well-being for students.
• $11.5 million for Education Savings Accounts.
• $2 million cut to the Minnesota Department of Education
• $2.4 million cut to statewide testing and reporting.
• $1 million reduction in college entrance exam reimbursement.
• $2.3 million in savings from closing Perpich School for the Arts.

There's obvious a wide range of difference in the House and Senate bills both in terms of policy initiatives and funding.  I have only dealt with the funding in this entry and will look more at policy in tomorrow's entry.  The big differences in policy revolve around the House's approach to discipline policies and its changes in the area of teacher licensure.  The difference in overall funding targets alone show how far apart the two bodies are (House target is $725 million, Senate is $152 million).  Getting to yes may well be difficult, but there are moving parts throughout the budget including wide differences in tax policy that there are areas where trades can be made across budget areas.  The influx of Federal money and trying to determine its effects will likely be a key getting all work done by the end of the regular session slated for May 17.

 Schedule for the Week Ahead.  Just a quick blog entry to give everyone a head's up on what next week will look like in the committees constructing the omnibus education funding and policy bills in the House and Senate.  The House told a group of education lobbyists yesterday that their bill will be posted on the House Education Finance Committee on Monday.  The committee will do a walk-through of the bill on Tuesday morning during its scheduled committee time (10:30 AM until 12:00 PM).  They will take testimony on the bill during the same time slot on Wednesday and will do the bill mark-up on Thursday when amendments will be proposed.  The bill must be out of the House Ways and Means Committee by Friday.

The process in the Senate is not quite as well defined, but I expect that the bill will be released early in the week and there will be testimony and mark-up.  The Legislature does not meet on Monday, so it will be somewhat truncated week leading up to the committee deadline--Friday, April 9--for finance bills.

As Bette Davis once said:

Have a Happy Easter everyone!

Summer Bill Takes Its Next Step.  HF 1064--Governor Walz' "Summer Bill"--passed on the House floor today by a vote of 69-63.  When the bill was passed out of the House Ways and Means Committee last week on a bipartisan vote, there was conjecture that the floor vote would not be the almost strict party-line vote it turned out to be.  On the final vote, only one Republican--Dakota County Representative Pat Garofalo--crossed party lines by voting for the bill.  No DFLers voted against the bill.

One theme that will be a recurring one as this bill and, most likely, the omnibus education funding bills move forward is the distribution of revenue in the various Federal measures that have aimed to remedy education funding shortfalls resulting from the pandemic.  The Federal revenue is distributed first to states based on their national share of Title I revenue and then to individual districts based on their state share of Title I revenue.  This has led to an uneven distribution of benefits, much of which can be fairly easily justified as districts with higher levels of poverty and language barriers have faced additional challenges.  At the same time, an argument can be made that the fixed costs associated with reacting to the pandemic (delivering meals, building accommodations, personal protective equipment purchases) are similar across all districts and that the Federal dollars are not enough in many cases to fully reimburse districts that receive little Title I revenue for the costs they have incurred.  Two amendments that were offered, but defeated hit at this issue and while the "Summer" bill has moved on, it is likely that the dynamics around the distribution of Federal dollars will be revisited as the session continues.

 Floor Action!  The Senate plowed through four education-related bills today and if today's action is any indication of how things are going to unfold, it might get a little contentious as we wend our way through the remainder of the regular session.  One interesting indication today is that appears the Senate is intent on passing individual education policy bills instead of folding them into an omnibus bill.  There's no reason why the Senate couldn't include the four bills passed today in a later version of their omnibus bill, but passage today firmly states a Senate position on items that may (or may not) be in the House omnibus education funding and policy bill and can conceivably used in negotiations between the House and Senate as they work to reconcile the final education funding and policy package during conference committee.

Two of the bills--SF 710 (Duckworth) and SF 628 (Chamberlain)--had relatively smooth sailing, passing on votes of 65-0 and 57-8 respectively.  SF 710 would extend school districts' ability to move money between funds by board resolution, which is important in times of financial uncertainty for school districts and SF 628 would require the Minnesota Department of Education to develop a plan to administer the Minnesota Comprehensive Achievement tests to students this spring.  The other two bills--SF 819 (Dornink) and SF 438 (Chamberlain)--were subject to protracted debate and had much closer votes.  SF 819 passed on a 36-29 vote and SF 438 on a vote of 37-27.  The spirited debate and close vote on SF 438 were somewhat expected, as the bill seeks to delay the Minnesota Department of Education's standards review process; a process that has taken on heightened attention this year with discussion of new social studies standards.  The close vote on SF 819, while not entirely unexpected, is a bit of a puzzler as the bill simply creates a pilot program for short-call substitute teachers.  This bill was developed by staff in the Austin school district and it's a modest request that could reap big rewards for school districts throughout the state, but especially those in rural areas, where there are often shortages of people with bachelor's degrees.

It is unclear at this juncture if any of these items will appear on the House side.  The House Education Policy Committee did hear the House companion bill to SF 819 (HF 699--Mueller) after the first committee deadline, but given the close vote in the Senate that was along partisan lines, it may not make the cut in the House.

All in all, today was a preview of what should be a spirited sprint once the Legislature returns from its break for religious holiday observances on April 6.

Governor's Summer Bill Takes Another Step.  After passing out of the House Education Finance Committee yesterday, HF 1064--the Governor's "Summer" Bill--cleared another hurdle early this evening when it was passed by the House Ways and Means Committee on a bipartisan vote of 21-7.   The bill contains over $100 million in revenue aimed at providing a partial make-up of lost revenue due to smaller than anticipated enrollments, expanded summer school, early college for 2021 high school graduates, expanded mental health supports for students, and increased early childhood programs to prepare students for kindergarten.  While it has never been stated outwardly as a goal, it is believed that the House would like to pass this bill well before the end of session--hopefully no later than mid-April--to allow districts to implement their planned summer programs.  In my conversations, most districts have the planning process underway, but it is unclear how much revenue may come forth and in what form the revenue will come.  It's an understatement to say that the last two years have been extremely disruptive to the learning process and districts want to get recovery efforts underway and hopefully get everything set for the hoped-for "normal" opening of schools in September.  HF 1064 is expected to pass the House, but it faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, where the companion bill was heard in committee but no action was taken.

Senate Targets Released.  The Senate Majority Caucus released their budget targets for the 2021 session yesterday.  Their total budget comes in $500 million below the Governor Walz' budget recommendations, but one has to remember that the Governor does have tax increases and the Senate majority is seeking to provide tax changes that would exempt PPP loans and enhanced unemployment benefits from state income taxes.  It's difficult to discern the actual increases in some state budget areas because they are used biennium-over-biennium figures in their presentation, but the net increase for E-12 education appears to be in the neighborhood of $150 million.  We have yet to see the House budget targets to complete the three points of the target triangle, but those figures will likely be closer to the Governor's which will set up an interesting end of session.  With all of the Federal money flowing into the state from the various COVID responses, there will be sufficient revenue to meet most needs (and probably a lot of wants) for the immediate future, but trying to balance one-time revenues with on-going commitments is always a challenge even in the best and most predictable times.  Expect a roller coaster from now until the regular session curtain comes down on May 17.

Here is a link to the MPR story on the Republican budget targets:

Minnesota Senate Republicans counter Walz budget proposal

The Early Stages of Gelling.  The omnibus funding bill deadline is still a ways away, but with the passage of the first policy bill deadline, we're starting to see bills take shape, at least on the House side of the equation.  The Senate continues to hear bills that they will consider as part of their combined policy/funding bills that will be issued either right before or right after the religious observance break that takes place from Friday, March 26, through Monday, April 5.  The House Education Policy Committee heard three bills that were heard in the Senate prior to last Friday's first policy bill deadline.  Of the three bills, the ones most interesting to school districts are Representative Patricia Mueller's HF 699 that would create a pilot for short-term substitute teachers.  The bill's genesis is the Austin school district and it was great to see Austin school district staff testifying in favor of the bill.  The other bill of interest was HF 710, a bill authored by Representative Steve Sandell that would require PELSB to work with Minnesota's teacher preparation programs to make sure that all teacher licensure areas are covered.  This will likely require working agreements with teacher preparation programs in other states as not all licensure areas are currently covered by Minnesota teacher preparation programs.

The Senate ran through a series of bills in a rapid-fire fashion.  The highlights (or lowlights depending on your vantage point) were Senator Steve Cwodzinski's SF 240 that would require all Minnesota students to take a civics course in either their 11th or 12th grade years.  The bill was roundly praised and given the fact this provision is in the House omnibus education policy bill, the chances of it surviving the conference committee process and becoming law seem to be increasing.  It was really great to hear Senator Rosen's  SF 789 before the committee.  This bill is the brainchild of Fairmont Area Schools Superintendent Joe Brown who has worked on getting it passed for a number of years.  The bill would allow students to take career-technical courses outside regular school hours through a shared-time arrangements.  Superintendent Brown has consistently made the case that under current school schedules, students' ability to take career-technical courses are often constricted by other commitments.  Other bills included:  SF 1443 (Rosen), SF 1537 (Coleman), SF 1554 (Koran), and SF 1709 (Coleman).

Interesting Editorial.  Former Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Eric Magnuson penned a very insightful editorial in this morning's Minneapolis StarTribune.  It's hard to believe that it has been almost 30 years since Skeen was decided and the state's education funding system was upheld.  It also needs to be pointed out that Magnuson was counsel for the intervenors in the case against the plaintiffs.  The plaintiffs, of course, were comprised of parents from SEE (then ASGSD) school districts.  All that said, Magnuson makes a number of strong points while arguing in favor of the proposed Constitutional amendment largely fashioned by former Supreme Court Justice Alan Page.  The piece highlights Page's dissent in Skeen, which in a very large sense underpins the foundation of the proposed amendment.

With no further adieu:  Minnesota schools must aim higher with the Page amendment

 Things are Starting to Heat Up.

With the first committee deadline looming, things have started to move along as committees begin focusing on the first big steps toward honing their legislative statements for the session.  It was a bit of a respite from hearing bills that will be acted upon as on Monday, the House Education Policy Committee heard HF 874 (Hassan), the proposed constitutional amendment that has been promoted by former Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page and Minneapolis Federal Reserve Chair Neil Kashkari.  The only real surprise in the testimony came from a number of witnesses who home school their children.  I'm familiar with most of the arguments for and against the amendment, but there were several home school parents who believe that, if passed, the amendment would give the state the power to force their children out of their current home school arrangement and push them into other learning environments.  It's not an argument I had heard before and I'm not a lawyer, so I can't really comment on the validity of their stance.  It just seems very out of the ordinary.

While the constitutional amendment is controversial enough, it was merely a warm-up for the Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee later on Monday where Senator Roger Chamberlain's SF 1525 was heard.  SF 1525 promotes Education Savings Accounts which could be used for private school tuition.  The label on the initiative keeps changing, but the basic direction remains the same and the annual parade of testifiers looks remarkably the same year after year.  It was a spirited discussion and much of that discussion is centered on vastly different approaches to closing the achievement gap between white students and students of color.  Some believe that provide families greater control over their educational choices is the way to go, while others believe that the traditional system has not been given the level of support necessary to get to the heart of the challenges to higher achievement.

In some ways, these two hearings revolved around the same issue of how to close the achievement and opportunity gaps and it it fascinating to see how groups align when confronting these two initiatives.

House Omnibus Policy Bill Posted and Heard.  The House Education Policy Committee heard the committee's omnibus policy bill today.  The bill HF 1081 Delete-all Amendment (Richardson) is quite comprehensive and covers a lot of areas.  The two sets of provisions that are the highest profile are the proposed changes to pupil dismissal and the tiered-licensure program overseen by PELSB.  That wasn't the issue that elicited the greatest reaction from witnesses.  Much of the testimony for or against provisions of the bill came from familiar quarters, but as in the case of the constitutional amendment, there was a stream of home school parents who object to language in the bill that would require home schoolers to report their children's test scores to the state.  About a decade ago, reporting requirements for home schoolers were greatly streamlined and while not marking a full return to the days when home schooling was more carefully monitored, it is a change that is being viewed as an intrusion on the rights of the home school families.  The bill will be fully discussed on Friday and a number of amendments will be offered.  The bill is longer than I anticipated it would be when the session began, but even with the challenges of "virtual" legislating, a number of ambitious proposals came forward on a broad range of education issues--increasing the number of teachers of color, tiered licensure, school discipline--that have been incorporated into this bill.  The Senate omnibus education policy bill, which will be unveiled tomorrow, will also be discussed in committee on Friday.

Equalization Day.  The Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee heard Senator Roger Chamberlain's SF 626 today and along with South St. Paul superintendent Dave Webb, I got to testify in favor of the bill.  While not as big a proposal in terms of size as the Governor's equalization proposal, it does devote $25 million in equalization aid to making the voter-approved referendum levy more fair.  The Governor's primary concentration is on bringing greater equalization to the local option revenue, which is more general property tax relief across a broader set of districts.  Senator Chamberlain wants to target relief to those districts that have already passed voter-approved levies beyond the $724 per pupil unit in local option revenue.  Senator Chamberlain is a strong supporter of property tax fairness and I believe there will be an expression of that support in either the Senate omnibus education bill or the Senate omnibus tax bill.  

The House Education Policy Committee spent most of its hearing on HF 1376, a bill that would overhaul the tiered licensure framework that was passed by the Legislature in 2017 and was phased in over the next year.  There are considerable changes proposed in the bill and there was a considerable amount of pushback from several witnesses--mainly Tier 1 and Tier 2 teachers--who believe the bill would preclude them from continuing to work as a teacher.  It was also argued that the bill could exacerbate the current teacher shortage.  I have posted the summary below.  The teacher licensure changes begin on page 4 (Section 24).

Bill Summary--HF 1376

Governor's Bill Presented, Supported, and Questioned.  The House Education Funding Committee heard HF 1065 (Davnie) this morning and the bill was presented in its entirety by Minnesota Department of Education Deputy Commissioner Heather Mueller, Director of School Finance Terri Yetter, and Director of Government Affairs Adosh Unni.  They did a comprehensive job explaining the bill and they did it in rapid fire fashion, which allowed for a considerable amount of public testimony supporting the bill.  In addition to support for the more basic elements of the bill  (basic formula increase, special education cross-subsidy hold harmless aid, increase in the English Language formula, and a healthy increase in property tax equalization combined with simplification of the levy framework), witnesses voiced support for proposals like the student support personnel aid program and student mental health supports.  There is a lot in the bill, which elicited questioning from Republicans on the committee who believe the bill is too large and contains too many programs that don't address basic student and school district needs and instead goes in other directions.  There are new programs that can be framed as mandates in the bill (and also in the Governor's policy bill) and it will be interesting to see what survives the process this session.  There are clearly different visions of Minnesota's education future between the caucuses both in the House and Senate and between the branches of government, so it's going to make for an interesting ride.

I want to thank St. Michael-Albertville Superintendent Ann-Marie Foucault for testifying on behalf of SEE, MREA, AMSD, MSBA, and MASA in favor of the equalization sections of the Governor's bill.  As superintendent of a low property wealth district with a high debt service load, Superintendent Foucault knows firsthand the funding challenges that districts with that profile face and how taxpayer fairness is needed to help level the playing field both in terms of funding and taxpayer burden,

Big day tomorrow with the announcement of the February budget forecast, which will provide a picture of the fiscal confines that will dictate legislative action from here until May (or June . . . or July).

Wondrous Wednesday.  Wednesday is always the busiest day in the education universe at the State Capitol, with House and Senate K-12 committees all meeting at their appointed times.  The House Education Finance Committee took up two bills that had been passed up to them after gaining approval of the House Education Policy Committee last week.  Representative Cheryl Youakim's HF 378 would provide funding for paid training for paraprofessionals working in Minnesota schools and Representative Fue Lee's HF 786 would fund after-school community academic programs.  The bills were laid over for possible inclusion in the omnibus education funding bill and no funding amounts are contained in the bill at this time.  The bills appear to have fairly strong support in the majority caucus, so it won't be surprising if these proposals have some presence in the House's omnibus bill.  The question will be over how much money may be dedicated to these efforts and we aren't clear on what level of revenue will be available moving forward.  Things will likely be clearer after the February budget forecast is released on Friday.

The House Education Policy tackled the Governor's Policy Bill--HF 950 (Richardson)--and spent the entire committee time discussing the bill.  The bill is approximately 80 pages, which isn't overly large for a policy bill, but it does contain some fairly sweeping recommendations that proponents view as necessary upgrades to Minnesota's education system while others view them as onerous mandates.  The bill features the changes in student suspension policies that have been hotly-debated the last few sessions.  The primary goal of this provision is to combat the disproportional suspension rates for students of color and special education students.  Another section of the bill calls for the implementation of multi-tiered systems of support; a framework that has been picking up steam nationally.  The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in the committee's omnibus recommendations that will be constructed over the next two weeks.  Much of this bill will likely be contained in that later package, but the committee may not accept all of it.

The last committee of the day was the Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee and the committee concentrated on a variety of initiatives related to teachers with most of the concentration on increasing the number of teachers of color in Minnesota.  SF 446 (Abeler) The Increase Teachers of Color Act and SF 526 (Koran) The Black Men Teach Twin Cities Program zero in on the goal of getting more people of color into Minnesota's teaching ranks and keeping them there.  Senator Julia Coleman's SF 781 is not as direct in promoting increasing the number of teachers of color, but it does propose a set of bargaining and hiring changes that may prevent teachers of color from being laid off due to lack of seniority.  This bill eliminates the practice of last-in/first-out, which made it the most controversial bill of the day (if anything in the initial stages of legislative discussion truly be described as controversial).  Senator Roger Chamberlain's SF 784 requires all school districts to establish a teacher mentoring program and use district staff development dollars to implement and maintain it.  The companion to this bill--HF 561 (Urdahl)--has been heard in the House.  SF 819 (Dornink), a bill that would create a pilot program for short-call substitute teachers was also heard.  The Human Resources Director for the Austin School District (Go SEE members!) testified in favor and made a compelling case as to why policy surrounding short-call substitute teachers need to be revised due to the extreme shortage in substitute teachers.

Two-Bill Tuesday.  The House Education Funding Committee was the only education-related committee that met today and they covered two bills during their hearing.  The first bill--HF 1024 (Pinto)--would create a cabinet-level Department of Early Childhood.  The new department would transfer some employee complement from the departments of Human Services, Education, and Health and put them under one administrative roof.  If the bill is passed and signed by the Governor, the new agency would take effect January 1, 2023.  While few, if any, of the current legislative roster were around in the early-1990s when the Department of Children, Families, and Learning was created and many of the same employee transfers took place.  That agency last about a decade before it was split apart during the Pawlenty Administration with the various employees and state program jurisdictions returned to their original agencies.  This initiative somewhat deviates from that effort in that it creates a single new agency instead of adding onto an existing agency (Education) from other agencies (Human Services and Health).  A case can be made that creating an agency that would give parents of young children a one-stop agency instead of having to deal with programs that are funded in one budget and administered by a different agency is a good idea, but there will also be pushback from those who believe these programs can be streamlined (or reassigned) to cut through some of the confusion that is currently experienced.  The committee approved the bill and sent it on its way to its next committee.

The committee then turned to a bill that is already moving in the Senate.  HF 288 (Edelson) would create a grant program that would allocate $1 million in each of the next two years to school districts to provide staff development in the LETRS (Language Essentials for Teacher of Reading and Spelling).  The success of this scientifically-based reading program is well documented and it appears to have strong support in both the House and Senate.  I neglected to include the LETRS website when I wrote about the Senate hearing on this bill, so I will do that here:  LETRS

Monday, Monday. The House Education Policy Committee and the Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee met today and both hearings were interesting.  The House Education Policy Committee featured a presentation by a number of agricultural interests stressing the importance of Agriculture in the Classroom initiatives.  Agriculture continues to play a large role in the Minnesota economy. While the number of people actively involved in day-to-day farming has decreased over the decades, the food industry remains very strong and that fact was stressed mightily throughout the presentation.  Another angle that was brought up and discussed was how in an era where more and more of Minnesota's population lives in urban and suburban communities it is important that Minnesota students are exposed to the "food cycle" to gain a more comprehensive understanding of where their food comes from and the work required to put food on the table of Minnesotans.  

The committee then moved to Representative Urdahl's HF 562 , a bill that would require Civics be taught as a course (instead of standards) in 11th or 12th grade in Minnesota high schools.  The bill also would give students the option of studying either personal finance or economics and not both.  Representative Urdahl has been working on this bill for a number of years and the arguments do make some sense.  There are always issues surrounding when Civics should be taught (most Minnesota schools do it in 9th or 10th grade) and what some consider to be a diminished ability of students to take electives if another course is formally wedged into the curriculum.  The other part of the bill that provides a choice between economics and personal finance is a little trickier seeing that Minnesota social studies standards cover both of these subjects and the standards are often embedded into classes as opposed to being taught as stand-alone subjects. The case for more attention to social studies in general--and perhaps Civics in particular--has been building over the past decade and complications notwithstanding, it will be interesting to see where the discussion goes this year.

The Senate tackled four bills:

SF 707 (Nelson)--This is the bill that provides grants to the 12 education partnerships that exist throughout Minnesota.  These partnerships--heard earlier in the session in the House as HF 156--have been vitally important during the pandemic as they have helped families in a wide variety of ways with a focus of helping students academically and meeting their basic needs.

SF 987 (Dornink)--Legislation that would require recipients of legislative grants to provide data analysis outlining the results obtained from the grant.

SF 628 (Chamberlain)--This bill would require school districts to administer the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments tests this spring whether the students are still in distance learning or not.  The argument for the bill is that it is extremely important to obtain baseline data for students who have not been in formal classroom settings for much--if not all--of the past year.  The argument against is that the scores won't mean that much and that it will be extremely difficult for school districts to implement the tests.

SF 859 (Hoffman)--This bill was introduced last session, but like so much legislation it fell by the wayside as the pandemic forced the Legislature into hybrid mode.  Under the bill, families could negotiate with school districts to have the private duty nurse that provides health supports to their medically fragile child to accompany their child to school and perform the same services in that setting.  It seems straightforward, but as we all know, when it comes to special education law, nothing is straight forward.  Advocates and providers have worked to come to a compromise over the past year, but there are still several outstanding issues to be resolved, most of them around the status of Federal law as it pertains to these potential arrangements.

In the spirit of today's blog title, let's jump in the Wayback Machine and set the date to 1966 and listen to the Mamas and the Papas on Ed Sullivans really be "shoe" singing "Monday, Monday."

First Education Floor Action.  There's been some major legislation passed of the floor of a legislative body this session, but today was the first time that an education-related bill has been acting upon.  The Senate passed SF 2 by a vote of 40-27.  I have not seen the roll call, but given the final vote, it's apparent that several DFLers supported the bill.  The bill is very straightforward in that it prohibits the Governor, current and future, from closing schools through an emergency order.  Passage was expected, but the bill's path likely ends here as it is highly doubtful it will get out of committee in the House of Representatives.  That doesn't mean that COVID and the state's response to COVID won't remain high-profile subjects throughout the 2021 legislative session.  I am not surprised, but it is a little disappointing seeing that there was agreement shortly after the election on a substantial COVID relief package that there isn't a more unified approach on how to move forward. 

New Guidance on School Opening.  Governor Walz issued new guidance regarding getting schools back to normal with an expectation that all middle and high school students will be back in the classroom by March 8.  Many districts have already been bringing students back in and this should accelerate that process.  There will likely be some tricky adjustments as spelled out in the guidance, but this go-ahead is what parents and school personnel have been hoping for.

Here is a link to the Minnesota Department of Education's guidance on the re-opening:  Prioritizing In-Person Learning for All Students

Single Education-Related Committee Today.  The House Education Finance Committee was the only education-related meeting today.  The committee heard two bills:  HF 587 and HF 725.  HF 587 (Murphy) is the full service community bill that has been considered the past few sessions and is contained in the Governor's budget recommendations.  HF 725 (Youakim) would expand extended time revenue for districts for every student they place in a facility offering mental health services, juvenile justice services, or related programming.  District 287 Superintendent Sandy Lewandowski provided concise and insightful testimony on the challenges faced by students and service providers who face a situation that necessitates such a placement and how HF 725 would be helpful.  

Wednesday Tripleheader.   The day led off with the House Education Finance Committee hearing Representative Paul Marquart's HF 498, a bill that would allow districts to include in their Long Term Facilities Maintenance levy costs associated with maintenance at cooperative units (intermediate districts, cooperatives, joint powers agreements) to which they belong.

The action then moved to the House Education Policy Committee in the early afternoon.  The committee covered three bills, the first being Representative Cheryl Youakim's HF 378.  HF 378 would establish a minimum of 16 hours of training for paraprofessionals, Title I aides, and other instructional support personnel, with 8 of these hours needing to be completed prior to the first day of school.  The bill provides for funding of this training and the bill was re-referred to the Education Finance Committee after passing on a split vote on which several, but not all, Republicans voted against it.  The committee then moved to HF 469, Representative Kelly Moller's bill that would require seizure training for school personnel and require school districts to have a seizure action plan.  The testimony in favor of the bill was quite moving and it's a testament to the students who suffer from seizure disorders and their parents for their fortitude in dealing with the challenging medical effects related to seizures.  The committee ended by considering HF 786, a bill authored by Representative Fue Lee that would modify and fund after-school academic programs.  As in the case of HF 378, because the bill calls for funding, it now will head to the Education Finance Committee.

The day ended with a whirlwind session of the Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee.  SF 790 would provide funding for the Sanneh Foundation.  Senator Zack Duckworth is the chief author of the bill.  The committee then turned to all of the Governor's recommendations that are carried in three bills that have been introduced:  

SF 973 (Chamberlain)--Governor's "Summer" Bill

SF 960 (Chamberlain)--Governor's Budget Recommendations

SF 788 (Chamberlain)--Minnesota Department of Education Policy Bill

Minnesota Department of Education staff went through the highlights of the budget at a brisk pace and testimony on the provisions was quite limited.

 Governor's "Summer" Bill Heard in House Education Finance Committee.  The House Education Finance Committee heard HF 1064 this morning.  The lion's share of the bill provides assistance to students who have been adversely affected by the state's transition to hybrid and distance learning through a variety of educational opportunities,  Here is a breakdown of those funding initiatives:

• $5 million for community partnerships for tutoring and mentoring programs.  Eligible programs include school districts, charter schools, intermediate districts, and cooperative units.  Maximum grant amount is $100,000.
• $3.25 million for expanded tutoring.  Same programs eligible as with community partnerships.  Maximum grant amount is $200,000.
• $1 million for mental health supports.  School districts and charter schools eligible.
• $10 million for field trips and hands-on learning experiences.  School districts and charter schools eligible.  Revenue distributed per ADM and concentration of students eligible for free or reduced price lunch.
• $10 million for Adult Basic Education.
• $5 million for neighborhood programs.
• $20 million for Summer pre-school programs.  Grant amount of up to $4,800 per student,
• $6 million for Summer college program for graduating seniors.  Grant amount of up to $512 per course.
• $6 million for School-Linked Mental Health Program.
• $1.025 million to the Office of Higher Education for learning acceleration and college readiness initiatives and to combat learning loss of historically underserved students.
• $25 million to school districts who have lost enrollment due to the pandemic by increasing the percentage in the declining pupil aid program from 25% to 48.5%.

The funding for all these programs comes in FY 21 and the programs run for this summer only.  It is hoped that this bill will be passed early in the session so that education providers can plan to implement the programs outlined in HF 1064 smoothly.

There was a lot of testimony in support of the bill, both written and presented.  The companion to HF 1064--SF 973--will be heard in the Senate Education Finance and Policy Committee tomorrow along with the Governor's budget recommendations and the Department of Education's policy bill.  Full day ahead.

Flying Through a Monday.  I'm always reminded on days like these when the temperature flirts with 20 degrees below zero that as bad as I think the weather is treating me when my car won't start, I can't imagine my father having to get up at 3:30 in the morning and taking an axe to the ice in the water trough outside our barn so the cows could drink.

It's President's Day and there's no mail, but the Legislature still meets and held floor sessions and committee meetings today.  The House Education Policy Committee had an abbreviated session today and took up two bills that were knocked off the agenda last week when the committee went overtime on the comprehensive sex education bill.  The bills considered today are both authored by Republicans.  Representative Dean Urdahl's HF 561 would require that school districts set aside a portion of the current staff development reserve fund and invest the revenue into teacher mentorship programs.  Under the bill, the Minnesota Department of Education in consultation with education groups must develop a model plan for teacher mentorship and provide funding for its implementation.  The committee then moved on to HF 351, a bill authored by Representative Peggy Scott that would suspend the current academic standards review process and have the Commissioner of Education report back to the Legislature in 2022 with findings as to if the standards review process should be revised and, if so, how it should be revised.

Action then crossed the street (if there is such a concept as a street in the universe of distance-legislating) with the Senate tackling four bills during its committee hearing.  First up was Senator Roger Chamberlain's SF 627, which would slightly increase the safe schools revenue category, equalize the levy, and would extend safe schools revenue to the intermediate districts and cooperative units.  The committee turned to Senator Justin Eichorn's SF 925.  SF 925 would expand eligibility for counseling services provided to nonpublic schools to include elementary school students.  Private schools have long qualified for state aid for counseling services, but those services are only available to secondary level students.  Informal discussion of SF 1012--another bill authored by Senator Chamberlain--then took place.  Earlier in the session, the committee heard from experts and parents about the negative effects of social media on students.  SF 1012 would provide a grant to the non-profit LiveMoreScreenLess to identify a network of partners to help develop and implement a train-the-trainer model to help combat cyberbullying and other aspects of social media that are damaging students.  Capping off the hearing was Senator Cwodzinski's SF 237, which would limit the allowable screen use by students in Pre-K and Kindergarten classrooms.  Under the bill, students in those levels could not use a screen unless under direct engagement with a teacher.  The bill also calls for the Minnesota Department of Education to contract for the production of educational materials that would inform parents of the effects screen use on children.