In our sixth episode of AWSP TV, OSPI's Sue Anderson (Director of Educator Effectiveness) talks to our Ron Sisson about putting the G (growth) in TPEP, as well as a few more topics around evaluation, coaching, mentoring, and induction.

“Time is like a river,
made up of the events which happen, and a violent stream;
for as soon as a thing has been seen, it is carried away,
and another comes in its place,
and this will be carried away too,
until at last something hits shore.”
― Marcus Aurelius

After this last deadline, attention now moves to both chamber floors. Action will primarily consist of both chambers debating and voting on bills that have passed either chamber. I’ve earlier explained the concurrence, dispute, and/or conference committee avenues of resolution. Simultaneously, meetings often held in backrooms away from public and member scrutiny, are being held as issues like the budget and revenue enhancements are bargained.

A “**“ before a bill indicates that is it either NTIB (Necessary to Implement the Budget) or as I’ve suggested, NTPB (Necessary to Pass the Budget). Therefore, the issue remains alive as does anything the Legislature wants to revive or introduce.

Retirement/ Pension Related Proposals

SB 5360 changes the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2, effective July 1, 2020. Since this bill is now identical to the House version, it will be sent to the House for concurrence.

**SB 5999 appropriates $183,749,000 from the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) to be used to reduce the Teachers’ Retirement System Plan 1 underfunded actuarially accrued liability which is estimated to be $3 billion dollars. Currently, employers are paying an added surcharge on pension contributions to help decrease the unfunded liability. The current plan is to be 100% fully funded by 2026. Keep in mind that is because of a projection that projects premiums and deaths of the older members. It was passed by Executive Session in the Senate Ways and Means Committee and sent to Rules.

Although, sound in principle, caution should be applied. WSSDA testified in support of moving these dollars that currently earn 3% into a fund that earns 7%. “It just makes financial sense.” However, removing these dollars from the BSA also removes dollars that could be used in the future to fund other needs like special education’s unfunded costs? These dollars could be used to avoid cuts that may come should a recession occur. Another bill, SB 6009, passing committee, makes expenditures from the BSA for declared catastrophic events (like fires). How many times can the Legislature go to this well for funds, and not close the door for other uses?

SJR 8211 proposes an amendment to the Constitution concerning revenues from certain premiums, contributions, and other charges imposed on wages. Sponsors: Braun, Keiser, Palumbo, Schoesler, Conway, Van De Wege. This bill was introduced late but has been scheduled for hearing and action before the Senate Ways and Means Committee. It is a ‘simple’ bills that states, “Notwithstanding any other section or article of this Constitution, revenues from premiums, contributions, or other charges imposed on wages for the purpose of creating an actuarially sound system for the provision of future benefits or services only to payers must be deposited into a special fund in the state treasury to be used exclusively for the purposes for which it was imposed.” The bold print was to show the ‘catch’. Clearly this is to ensure that certain funds cannot be ‘raided’ to help balance the budget. The Committee took no action on this bill.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

E2SHB 1139 expands the current and future educator workforce supply. It passed the Senate 26–22 and has been sent back to the House for concurrence with its changes/amendments.

**HB 1390 requires beneficiaries who are receiving a monthly benefit from the PERS or TRS plans 1 to receive a one-time 3% cost of living adjustment. It is contained in ESHB 1109 which is the budget adopted by the Senate.

SB 5350 authorizes an individual at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit. This bill has passed both chambers and is awaiting signatures.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB) Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 asks for a 2-year delay in SEBB implementation for ESD’s. This proposal is technically ‘dead’. However, an amendment to the budget was adopted and is part of ESHB 1109 cited above. It is likely to die. (Budget provisos/amendments can fund actions, but it is a stretch for a budget to establish a policy that has not been passed in legislation by the legislature.)

**SB 6011 concerns health care benefits for public school employees. Sponsors: Mullet (D), Braun (R). This bill was introduced late, (April 13), and has not been scheduled for a hearing. It is a direct outgrowth of proposed budget amendments that failed. Both Senators are concerned with the high cost of SEBB. This bill would help to correct that and according to staff save an estimated $150 million dollars. Among other provisions it would raise the qualifying bar to 1,040 hours and allow for the prorating of benefits.

The issue of SEBB and funding may well be an ‘endgame’ budget player. Stay tuned.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts

ESHB 1813 did not make it out of Senate Rules. This bill provides that school districts could only enter into pupil transportation service contracts with nongovernmental entities that provide health and retirement benefit contributions to their employees that are equivalent to those received by school employees. It appears to be ‘dead’, however, with the strong labor focus of this session, this may be one to come back.

2SHB 1087 concerns long-term services and supports passed the House 63–33 and passed the Senate 26–22. Because of adopted amendments, it has been sent back to the House for further action.

Beginning January 1, 2022, employers will collect from employees in Washington who are working an assessed premium of 0.58 percent of their wages for deposit into a state dedicated fund. Once qualified due to work history, an individual could claim up to $36,500 in lifetime benefits toward meeting the costs of aging and ailing.

SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. Signed by the Governor, this becomes in effect on 7/28/19.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

In this episode of AWSP News we discuss:

• your district’s principal contracts,
• some of the strategies a few districts are using to boost principal salaries,
• a new report from Wallace Foundation,
• National Assistant Principals Week,
• our “Walk a Mile in My Shoes” campaign winners,
• School Library Month and a handful of book recommendations from Scholastic,
• our sponsor City university,
• the Native American Leadership Camp and
• Administrative Professionals Week and Day.

Prefer to read the news? Check out the script.

Here are some recent articles that might interest you if you are trying to keep track of budget discussions.

• This article is by DJ Wilson of the Washington State Wire and it explains how the budget process actually works.
  
• The Washington Research Council published this comparison chart of the House and Senate budgets.
• And, OSPI has budget tools for the 2019-20 school year on its webpage. Click on the Multi-Year Budget Comparison Tool to see how your district fares in the Governor’s budget, the House budget and the Senate budget.

If you have any questions, let me know! 

The exercise of spatial autonomy can promote children’s sense of self with places in their environment
This research used child-led tours to investigate how young children’s spatial autonomy is enacted in two contrasting environments: their home and a forest setting. Spatial autonomy, by inviting children to form a relationship with their environment, can promote agency, a sense of self, self-confidence, and a healthy relationship with their environment.   
Green, 2018. Young children's spatial autonomy in their home environment and a forest setting. 

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt. – Mark Twain

“No! No! No!” was the constant refrain heard as the committees and floor debated numerous amendments to the budget proposals. Requests for spending totaled more than the amount either house was willing to spend or to make a priority.

Concurrently, policy committees continued to hear and then move bills. All of which have been reported previously in greater detail.

Retirement Related Proposals

SB 5360/ESHB 1308 changes the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2. SB 5360 passed the Senate, 39–9. ESHB 1308 passed the House 74–22. Both are in their respective Rules’ Committees awaiting further action. The only difference between the two bills is the date applicable to new employees. ESHB 1308 applies to any one hired after 7/1/2019; SB 5360 after 7/1/2020.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

E2SHB 1139 expands the current and future educator workforce supply has now been scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee on April 5th. This large bill has a section that would allow early certified and classified retirees to return to work for a limited time. WASA testified and asked that the exclusion of administrative positions be removed.

SB 5400/ HB 1390 requires beneficiaries who are receiving a monthly benefit from the PERS or TRS plans 1 to receive a one-time 3% cost of living adjustment. HB 1390 had a public hearing in February and was unanimously voted out of the House Appropriations’ Committee and sent to Rules. This bill is considered a ‘trailer bill’. If the money is appropriated in the budget, this bill would then need to be passed. Hopefully, it will be moved to the floor calendar.

Note: The original House budget did not include a COLA. However, through extensive lobbying, a floor amendment sponsored by Rep. Drew MacEwen (R) was adopted on a 94–0 vote. Representatives Leavitt and Kloba were the advocates and leaders within the Democratic caucus.

The Senate budget did not include a COLA, nor the increase in Medicare health insurance benefit. The House proposed an increase from $168 to $183. An amendment to grant a COLA sponsored by Sen. Holy was defeated in the Senate. Senator Steve Conway, chair of the Select Committee on Pension Policy, spoke in opposition even though the SCPP recommended this COLA.

SB 5350/HB 1413 authorize an individual at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit. SB 5350 passed the Senate 48–0. HB 1413 passed the House 90–7. Both are in their respective Rules’ Committees awaiting movement to the floor calendar.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 asks for a 2-year delay in SEBB implementation for ESD’s. This proposal never moved out of committee. However, an amendment to the budget was adopted by the Senate Ways and Means Committee. This change now has to be approved in the House budget.

Regarding SEBB: As stated last week, this whole SEBB cost projection and process is all built on assumptions. There are few, if any, facts available. Until the plan is up and running on January 1, 2020, the real effects and costs will not be known. So, to repeat what a cynic might say, “It appears that one set of figures is as good as any other”. That is certainly the case here.

The Health Care Authority (HCA) projected SEBB costs at $750 million; the House Budgeted (ESHB 1109) $650.7 million. HCA projected a funding rate of $1,114 for FY 20 and $1,127 for FY 21. The House projected $1,079 in FY 2020 and $1,106 for FY 21. The House also proposed a reduced rate for July 1-December 31, 2019 of $971. Along comes the Senate (SB 5153). The Senate proposed a rate of $994 for 2020 and $1,056 for 2021. Excluding the addition of budgeted maintenance level dollars, the House budgets $443 million; the Senate $319 million. So, the figures are all over the place.

At this point, it just becomes like the theater of the absurd. All these figures are just thrown about as though they have some solid factual base behind them when point of fact, there is no real base. The only known is that districts will be on the fiscal hook for covering all the costs of offering this benefit. As was stated earlier, the state can use the supplemental budget process during the next shorter session to correct any errors made in the legislature’s assumptions. These are appropriation/dollar errors made by the state, but districts still have to pay whatever costs emerge.

Thursday, April 4th, the Senate debated the budget. Two amendments proposed rejecting the SEBB collective bargaining agreement and directing the dollars elsewhere. Both failed, but if you are interested:

• Republican Sen. Braun’s proposal, which he withdrew.
• Democrat Sen. Mullet’s proposal, which was defeated.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts:

ESHB 1813 incorporates the costs of employee health benefits into school district contracts for pupil transportation.

This bill passed the House 56–39. An amended version was moved out of Senate Early Learning and K–12 Education Committee. It will have a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee on April 5th. WASA is opposed to this bill for the additional unfunded costs that will fall on districts.

2SSHB 1087 concerns long-term services and supports. It is scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee, April 5th. This bill is a major AARP want.

SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. This bill passed the House 71–23 and the Senate 40–06 and has been sent to the Governor for action.

Caveats: At this point in the process, previous bills thought ‘dead’ may bob to the surface regardless of where they were earlier in the session. The discussion of revenue and any resulting actions has just begun. Both proposed budgets include varying amounts of assumed revenues from changes in the present systems. Clearly, some revenue bills need to be passed. No easy feat. And if they are not passed, then both budgets need to make further cuts in their proposals. Even while holding the majority, it is clear that the Democratic caucus is split. One example is HB 2158, which would change some B & O taxes and impose taxes on some services among other things. Needless to say, there was a great deal of testimony opposed and in favor of making these changes. The net effect? The Senate Finance Committee, even with a Democrat majority, has scheduled executive action on this bill twice and postponed action. The third try will on the 5th.

Keeping to the river metaphor, each proposal to raise dollars dams the river and slows the flow. Breaching these dams will not be easy.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

P.S. Purely as an aside, two Republican budget amendments out of the 40+ were proposed that give a glimpse of how game playing occurs among these legislative adults. The Republican goal here was to either embarrass the Democrats or at least have them awkwardly defend something.

One amendment transferred $1.7 million dollars budgeted to the Department of Corrections to provide hot breakfasts for inmates. The R’s proposed transferring those dollars to the Meals on Wheels Program instead pitting seniors in need against convicts. “DOC couldn’t find existing money to provide hot breakfasts? Even hot oatmeal?” Statements like “That sure must be expensive oatmeal.” and “Our seniors could benefit from this expansion.” were heard. This was debated and then defeated on party lines.

The other amendment took $3.5 million dollars from the Governor’s biennial budget for security costs related to his executive protection unit and transferred those dollars to increase breast, cervical and colon cancer screening. The R’s wanted the Governor’s Presidential Campaign Committee to reimburse the state for any campaign related travel and resulting security coverage pitting a run for President against increasing cancer screens. (Senator Ericksen cattily pointed out that Inslee’s campaign may not even have enough money to reimburse the state.) After an awkward debate, this was also was defeated with a party line vote.

Such is Olympia.

Welcome to another episode of AWSP News, where we discuss:

• this year’s National Assistant Principals Week,
• how Vicki Puckett and the Mercer Island School District empower and use student voice,
• how the Association of Washington Student Leaders can help you harness student voice, and
• a great example from Bob Walters on how to use our pay gap video with your district administration.

Prefer to read the news? Check out the script.

“Life is like the river, sometimes it sweeps you gently along and sometimes the rapids come out of nowhere.” ― Emma Smith

That same Friday, (March 29th), the Senate will release its budget. The public hearing will be Monday, April Fools’ Day, so at least there is some time to review prior to that time.

Meanwhile, committees were holding hearings and moving some bills out through Executive Session. Following is a brief summary of bills that have had some action. If there was mention in the House budget, comments are noted in italics.

Retirement Related Proposals

SB 5360/ESHB 1308 | Revises provisions in the public employees’ retirement system, the teachers’ retirement system, and the school employees’ retirement system with regard to plan membership default. It would change the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2. SB 5360 passed the Senate, 39–9 and had a public hearing March 20th. ESHB 1308 passed the House 74–22 and had a public hearing on March 18th and is scheduled for Executive Session on April 1st.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

E2SHB 1139 | Educators that are members of Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) Plans 2 or 3 that retired under the 2008 Early Retirement Factors are permitted to return to work before age 65 in any non-administrative position, not just in substitute teaching and instructional positions, and work for up to 867 hours per year without suspension of pension benefits. The ending date on the current provisions of August 1, 2020, as well as the separate section expiring the section of law, are removed, making the section effective indefinitely. A provision similar to the TRS provision is created for School Employees’ Retirement System, which is for classified school employees. It passed the House 93–2, had a public hearing on March 18th and has yet to be scheduled for executive action. WASA testified in support with the request that the exclusion of administrators be removed.

Sidenote: Now might be the time to mention the games that legislators often play. Allegedly, this House bill, awaiting Senate committee action, is being held hostage because the House is reluctant to move some of the Senate’s favored bills, like the ones dealing with Sex Ed and Bullying. So, it’s like a game where one side is waiting for other side to blink. Meanwhile the bills are stalled and the time is ticking away. Stay tuned for the outcome.

Moving on…

SB 5400/ HB 1390 | Requires beneficiaries who are receiving a monthly benefit from the public employees’ retirement system plan 1 or the teachers’ retirement system plan 1 on July 1, 2018, to receive, effective July 1, 2019, an increase to their monthly benefit of three percent multiplied by the beneficiaries’ monthly benefit, not to exceed sixty-two dollars and fifty cents. HB 1390 had a public hearing in February. These bills are NTIB.

The House budget did not include any COLA for Plans 1 members, although it did raise the Medicare health benefit from $168 to $183 which was the amount previously paid prior to 2011.

This proposal is being lobbied extensively by WSSRA, WEA-Retired and RPEC and includes advocacy on multiple fronts. Most notably, Representatives Mari Leavitt and Shelley Kloba circulated a letter to all House members following the release of the budget. This letter argues for a COLA for these retirees. Thirty-five house members signed on in support. The question becomes, “Will they (particularly the Democrats) still vote “Aye” on the budget if a COLA is not granted?” Certainly this is an issue that the R’s will debate through a proposed amendment as an opportunity to embarrass the D’s. (Note earlier remarks about game playing.)

SB 5350/HB 1413 | Authorizes the following, at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit. SB 5350 passed the Senate 48–0 and has been scheduled for Executive Session on April 3rd before the House Appropriations Committee. HB 1413 passed the House 90–7, had a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee, was voted out and moved to Rules where it sits until moved to the floor calendar.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 | Concerning educational service district health benefits is a bill that asks for a 2-year delay in SEBB implementation for ESD’s. Although scheduled for Executive Session on Feb. 28th, no action has yet been taken. This bill is entwined with whole SEBB issue. It can be seen as NTIB.

The House budget funded SEBB. The Health Care Authority (HCA) projected SEBB costs at $750 million; the House Budgeted $650.7 million. HCA projected a funding rate of $1,114 for FY 20 and $1,127 for FY 21. The House projected $1,079 in FY 2020 and $1,106 for FY 21. Why the difference?

Simply put, this whole SEBB cost projection and process is all built on assumptions. There are few, if any, facts available and until the plan is up and running on January 1, 2020, the real effects and costs will not be known. So, a cynic might say, “One set of figures is as good as any other”. That is certainly the case here.

However, there was some thought to the House’s proposal. As mentioned in earlier reports,

• the House lowered the assumed medical inflation rate to 5%. The HCA’s rate allegedly ran from 6.5%–9%.
• Also, prior to January 1, 2020, districts will be paying benefits based on their existing labor contract(s) “They could conceivably gain some extra dollars during this period,” said one staff member since the state will be paying SEBB rates and it’s assumed district benefit costs are less than they will when SEBB requirements begin.
• Delaying the payback of the loan to the HCA to set up SEBB and changing the speed in which to build up a cash reserve were some other machinations done to lower the figure. The Senate is likely to fund SEBB similarly.
• Ultimately, as the staffer said, “The supplemental budget process during the next shorter session can be used to correct any errors in assumptions.”

Districts are left swimming with the unknowns.

The ‘good news’ is that Medicare remittance will decrease.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts:

ESHB 1813 | Incorporating the costs of employee health benefits and pension contributions into school district contracts for pupil transportation.

This bill passed the House 56–39 and a public hearing was held on March 25th. Two districts and WASA testified in opposition because of the added costs that are likely to fall on districts as vendors pass their costs along to the users. It was pointed out as well that not only will districts be paying the employer and employee costs there was nothing in the proposal that compelled the owner/contractor to provide those benefits to his/her employees. The bill has not moved since.

2SSHB 1087 | Concerns long-term services and supports. Creates a long-term care insurance benefit paid through an employee payroll premium, (0.058%). It passed the House 63/33 and was scheduled executive action before the Senate Health and Long-term Care Committee on March 20th, and no action was taken. It has been rescheduled for March 29th. This bill is a major AARP want.

SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. This bill passed the House 71–23 and the Senate 40–6 and has been sent to the Governor for action.

The budget had a number of amendments that passed. One amendment set the implicit price deflator (IPD) as the future measure when looking at inflationary increases. The traditional consumer price index (CPI) generates a higher rate of inflation using a different set of assumptions. The IPD generates a lower rate which stretches dollars wider helping those that create budgets and allocate dollars. It potentially hurts those who are impacted by inflationary increases not measured by the IPD.

The currents continue keeps everyone moving. The struggle remains to stay above water.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

Did you know that the average child in a military family will move six to nine times during a school career? That's an average of three times more frequently than non-military families. The Department of Defense sponsors the Month of the Military Child to honor military children and their families who make daily sacrifices for our country.

Supporting military children takes a school-wide effort, and professional development programs can help to inform school staff of the academic challenges that these children face. Throughout the month, we encourage schools to plan special events that applaud the resilience of military children. Also, consider incorporating the themes of this month into everyday school duties and activities. These types of efforts will highlight the importance of providing children with quality services to support them in navigating the celebrations and challenges of the military lifestyle.

The state of Washington serves over 136,000 military families in Tacoma, Everett, Spokane, Yakima, Pierce, Silverdale, and Whidbey Island.

Be sure that you “Purple Up” this April to celebrate the Month of the Military Child. And while you're at it, check out OSPI's website for a page full of great resources and information to support military-connected children.

How do you create a great school garden and not just let something wither on the vine? Check out the study below and find some tips to make the school garden a success.

School personnel and students make suggestions for improved implementation of school gardens

This study was based on the premise that experiencing the benefits of school gardens depends on successful implementation. School personnel and students, while positive about school gardens, identified barriers to success and offered recommendations for improved implementation, including involving external organizations and parents in the development and maintenance of the gardens. | Huys et al. 2017. School gardens: A qualitative study on implementation practices.

Read the Study

School bathrooms tend to have a bad rep. Historically, they’ve been known for being unkept or where mischief and bullying happen. However, many schools are taking their restrooms back and turning them into havens of inspiration, motivation, and peace.

Time is but the stream
I go a-fishing in. ~ Henry David Thoreau

This week has been filled with committee hearings on various bills as both houses rush to hear, then vote bills out of committee, in order to beat the next policy and fiscal deadlines.

The state revenue council issued the latest revenue projections and wow, the unanticipated and now new revenue shows an additional $861 million for the 2019–221 budget. Of course, remember at the start of the session, it was reported that the state was looking at over $1 billion-dollar shortfall after case load projections and funding court mandates. The Republican side and the Washington Policy Center argue that there is enough revenue now to fund all that is needed. The Democrats disagree. The focus is now on the House. They have created a package of revenue enhancements to fund all they wish and will release the budget Monday, March 25th with their suggested revenue proposals.

Following is a brief summary of bills that have had some action. A reminder that there are yet unknown bills that will be or determined to be necessary to implement the budget (NTIB). When two bills on the same topic are still alive, italics are used to indicate the likely vehicle that will advance.

A reminder: Again, this weekend many legislators have scheduled town halls to hear from their constituents. Some town halls were last weekend, but some scheduled them for this upcoming weekend. This remains an excellent opportunity to ask questions and air any concerns without having to come to Olympia.

Retirement Related Proposals

SB 5360/ESHB 1308 | Revises provisions in the public employees’ retirement system, the teachers’ retirement system, and the school employees’ retirement system with regard to plan membership default. It would change the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2. SB 5360 passed the Senate, 39/9 and had a public hearing March 20th. ESHB 1308 passed the House 74/22 and had a public hearing on March 18th and had action taken in Executive Session on March 21st.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

E2SHB 1139 | Educators that are members of Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) Plans 2 or 3 that retired under the 2008 Early Retirement Factors are permitted to return to work before age 65 in any non-administrative position, not just in substitute teaching and instructional positions, and work for up to 867 hours per year without suspension of pension benefits. The ending date on the current provisions of August 1, 2020, as well as the separate section expiring the section of law, are removed, making the section effective indefinitely. A provision similar to the TRS provision is created for School Employees’ Retirement System, which is for classified school employees. It passed the House 93–2, had a public hearing on March 18th and has yet to be scheduled for executive action. WASA testified in support with the request that the exclusion of administrators be removed.

SB 5400/HB 1390 | Requires beneficiaries who are receiving a monthly benefit from the public employees’ retirement system plan 1 or the teachers’ retirement system plan 1 on July 1, 2018, to receive, effective July 1, 2019, an increase to their monthly benefit of three percent multiplied by the beneficiaries’ monthly benefit, not to exceed sixty-two dollars and fifty cents. HB 1390 had a public hearing in February. Although there has been no further action, this bill is NTIB and is being actively worked by the Washington State School Retirees’ Association. Legislators are being lobbied hard to include a COLA in either budget to reflect the fact that Plan 1 members have not had any substantive cost of living increase since the COLA was removed in 2011. They did receive a one-time 1.5% increase last year but that has been it.

SB 5350/HB 1413 | Authorizes the following, at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit from: (1) The public employees’ retirement system plan 1 fund; (2) The public employees’ retirement system combined plan 2 and plan 3 fund; (3) The public safety employees’ retirement system plan 2 fund; or (4) The school employees’ retirement system combined plan 2 and 3 fund, as appropriate. SB 5350 passed the Senate 48/0 and has been scheduled for a public hearing on March 20th before the House Appropriations Committee. HB 1413 passed the House 90–7, had a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee, was voted out and moved to Rules where it sits until moved to the floor calendar.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 | Concerning educational service district health benefits is a bill that asks for a 2-year delay in SEBB implementation for ESD’s. Although scheduled for Executive Session on February 28th, no action was taken. This bill is entwined with whole SEBB issue. It can be seen as NTIB and could be dealt with once the Legislature decides how to deal with the SEBB issue. In talks with various legislators, it seems that they are confronting the state cost of SEBB and will fund it (at what level is yet to be seen). As one leading legislator said, “It’s the right thing to do for individuals and families.”

As an aside, and snarky remark coming, so much of what has been proposed this session in the social service area has been seen as ‘the right thing to do’ pitting groups against each other to compete with limited, if any, funds. Once again, the Legislature will likely end up ‘spreading peanut butter’ among all the competing interests. In short, giving everyone a slimmer slice of dollars, a smaller fish, than what they wanted or needed.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts:

ESHB 1813 | Incorporating the costs of employee health benefits and pension contributions into school district contracts for pupil transportation. More detail was provided in last week’s report.

This bill passed the House 56–39 and has been referred to the Senate Early Learning and K–12 Education Committee. A public hearing is scheduled for March 25th. WASA is opposed to this bill because of the added costs that are likely to fall on districts as vendors pass their costs along to the users.

2SSHB 1087 | Concerns long-term services and supports. States that the creation of a long-term care insurance benefit of an established dollar amount per day for eligible employees, paid through an employee payroll premium, (0.058%) is in the best interest of the state.” This would create an optional employee paid premium that would help cover long term care coverage for an employee. 2SSHB 1087 passed the House 63–33 and was scheduled executive action before the Senate Health and Long-term Care Committee on March 20th, yet, no action was taken.

SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. This bill passed the House 71–23. It passed out of the Senate Committee on Labor and Commerce and is in Rules, awaiting a move to the floor calendar.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

In this episode of AWSP News, we discuss:

• March Madness in our “Walk a Mile in My Shoes” campaign,
• our AWSP News special report on principal contracts and the pay gap,
• a new TPEP report from UW,
• The Main Idea education book review service you’ll soon have access to,
• our Equity Conference with WASA and WSSDA,
• OSPI’s MTSS Fest in Spokane,
• an updated survey for elementary science instruction, and
• the support of partners SPU and Horace Mann.

Prefer to read the news? Check out the script.

If it weren’t for the rocks in its bed,
The stream would have no song. - Carl Perkins

The legislative flow has now shifted to upcoming hearings where bills that have passed either house are scheduled for public hearings. The next deadline of note is the planned release on March 20th of the latest revenue forecast and projection. Budgets developed by both houses will follow.

Following is a brief summary of bills that are still alive, putting aside those yet unknown bills that will be or have been determined to be necessary to implement the budget. (NTIB). When two bills on the same topic are still alive, italics are used to indicate the likely vehicle that will advance.

As a reminder, this weekend many legislators have scheduled town halls to hear from their constituents. This is an excellent opportunity to ask questions and air any concerns without having to come to Olympia.

Retirement Related Proposals

SB 5360/ESHB 1308 revises provisions in the public employees’ retirement system, the teachers’ retirement system, and the school employees’ retirement system with regard to plan membership default. It would change the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2. SB 5360 passed the Senate, 39–9 and has been scheduled for a public hearing March 20th. ESHB 1308 passed the House 74–22 and has been referred to the Senate Ways and Means Committee.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

E2SHB 1139 | Educators that are members of Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) Plans 2 or 3 that retired under the 2008 Early Retirement Factors are permitted to return to work before age 65 in any non-administrative position, not just in substitute teaching and instructional positions, and work for up to 867 hours per year without suspension of pension benefits. The ending date on the current provisions of August 1, 2020, as well as the separate section expiring the section of law, are removed, making the section effective indefinitely. A provision similar to the TRS provision is created for School Employees’ Retirement System, which is for classified school employees. It passed the House 93/2 and is scheduled for a public hearing on March 18th.

SB 5350/HB 1413 authorizes the following, at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit from: 1. The public employees’ retirement system plan 1 fund;
2. The public employees’ retirement system combined plan 2 and plan 3 fund; 3. The public safety employees’ retirement system plan 2 fund; or
4. The school employees’ retirement system combined plan 2 and 3 fund, as appropriate.

SB 5350 passed the Senate 48–0 and has been scheduled for a public hearing on March 20th before the House Appropriations Committee. HB 1413 passed the House 90/7 and had a public hearing before the Senate Ways and Means Committee on March 9th and is scheduled for Executive Session on March 18th.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 | Concerning educational service district health benefits, is a bill that asks for a 2-year delay in SEBB implementation for ESD’s. Although scheduled for Executive Session on February 28th , no action was taken. This bill is entwined with whole SEBB issue. It can be seen as NTIB and could be dealt with once the Legislature decides how to deal with the SEBB issue…the high cost being the most pressing challenge for both budgets to solve.

During the last SEBB meeting, it was mentioned that in order to lower the cost to the General Fund, the state Legislature could do a number of things. The Health Care Authority outlined some of the choices the Legislature could do in order to decrease the state’s obligation.

During the March 7th SEB Board Meeting, it was mentioned that the Legislature could modify assumptions related to the loan repayment and premium stabilization reserve levels. Changes to any of the below items could also impact the funding rate:

• adjusting the HCA administrative budget,
• changing enrollment assumptions,
• restructuring the program and changing eligibility (not likely unless the collective bargaining agreement is rejected and new legislation is adopted),
• rejecting the CBA and changing assumptions related to employer and employee premium shares,
• lowering benefit levels while maintaining the 88% AV (such as eliminating acupuncture or chiropractic coverage), and
• lowering assumed trend (inflation and usage) rates for UMP plans.

Here’s what WEA posted on their website for their message to members about the SEBB.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts

ESHB 1813 | Incorporating the costs of employee health benefits and pension contributions into school district contracts for pupil transportation. As stated in the bill narrative: “Between the effective date of the bill and December 31, 2019, any pupil transportation services contract must include sufficient funds for the contract employer to provide employees of the contractor with an employer health benefits contribution equal to the allocation rate for school employees, less the retiree remittance, plus an amount equivalent to the total employer normal cost contribution rate to the School Employees’ Retirement System.

Beginning January 1, 2020, any pupil transportation services contract must include sufficient funds for the contract employer to provide employees of the contractor with an employer health benefits contribution equal to the rate established for the School Employees Benefits Board, less the retiree remittance, plus an amount equivalent to the total employer and employee contribution rate to the School Employees’ Retirement System.”

This bill passed the House 56–39 and has been referred to the Senate Education Committee.

SUGGESTED ACTION: This bill will add costs to a district who contracts for transportation services with a private provider. If concerned, one should contact members of the Senate Early Learning and K–12 Education committee and express your concerns. Previous testimony by WASA expressed concerns about the potential increased costs to school districts. Furthermore, if successful, districts who privately contract food services, for example, may well find themselves having to meet the same requirements.

2SSHB 1087 concerns long-term services and supports. The bills digest reads in part: “Addresses alternative funding for long-term care access. States that the creation of a long-term care insurance benefit of an established dollar amount per day for eligible employees, paid through an employee payroll premium, is in the best interest of the state.” This would create an optional employee paid premium that would help cover long term care coverage for an employee. 2SSHB 1087 passed the House 63–33 and has been scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Health and Long-term Care Committee on March 15th.

SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. This bill passed the House 71–23 and has been scheduled for a public hearing on March 14th before the Senate Committee on Labor and Commerce.

Meanwhile, these rocks create their own song.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

At-risk adolescents who participated in an Urban Forest Health Intervention Program showed an increase in life satisfaction and physical activity levels and a decrease in such risky behaviors as smoking. A control group of peers showed no such changes. (A study from Israel) | Tesler, Plaut & Endvelt (2018). The effects of an Urban Forest Health Intervention Program on physical activity, substance abuse, psychosomatic symptoms, and life satisfaction among adolescents.

“We try to steer the boat, we don’t alter the river.” ― J. Earp

Both houses have been on their respective floors debating and voting on various bills and amendments or in caucus/recess privately debating what bills to bring forth. Lobbyists hover outside each chamber’s doors waiting for requested legislators to come out. A lobbyist’s hope is to either encourage vote on a bill, to influence its content via suggested amendments, or to urge defeat.

The bulk of bills affecting pensions, health benefits, and other job-related benefits are all ‘necessary to implement the budget’, (NTIB) so action on any of the proposals is not likely to occur until a budget is released. March 23rd is the rumored date for release of the House budget.

Just FYI, the House has had 1,314 bills introduced; passed 202 and passed 3 Senate bills. The Senate has had 1,153 bills introduced; passed 183 and passed 6 House bills.

The next cut-off is March 13 where all bills except those determined to be NTIB have to be out of their house of origin.

This is just a summary of bills that have either seen some movement since last week’s report or new information has come to light.

Retirement Related Proposals

SB 5360 revises provisions in the public employees’ retirement system, the teachers’ retirement system, and the school employees’ retirement system with regard to plan membership default. It would change the present retirement plan default for new hires from Plan 3 to Plan 2. SB 5360 is on the Senate floor calendar awaiting action. Rumor has it that it will be brought forward for a vote.

Substitute Options for early Retirees

SHB 1139 | This is a large, comprehensive bill that Rep. Santos has tried for three sessions to get passed. As indicated in earlier reports, a section would allow early retirees to return to work certain positions. This bill remains in Rules. Discussions with legislators indicate that she has been asked to ‘downsize’ her bill. Otherwise, it is not likely to move any further.

SB 5350/HB 1413 authorizes the following, at the time of retirement, to purchase an optional actuarially equivalent life annuity benefit. HB 1413 passed the House 90–7. SB 5350 is on the Senate consent calendar.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

HB 2096 delays participation of non-represented Educational Service District (ESD) employees in the School Employees’ Benefits Board (SEBB) until January 1, 2024. Requires the Health Care Authority (HCA) to study ESD health benefits and the impact of ESD participation in SEBB. Legislators have indicated that until they decide what to do about SEBB, that this issue will be put on the back burner.

SEBB Costs: Late last Friday, the HCA released the new SEBB fixed funding rate.

1. Prior financial modeling in 2018 produced a SEBB Funding rate for FY20 of $1,174 per month. The Governor’s proposed budget included a SEBB funding rate of $1,170 for FY20 and $1,195 for FY21. Under the refreshed model delivered this week, the new SEBB Funding rate recommendation for FY20 is $1,114 and for FY21 $1,127.
2. Prior financial modeling produced an estimate of $860-$900M in additional new state benefits funding (to combine with $2 billion in current state benefits funding of benefits) for the SEBB program for the 19–21 biennium. The updated estimate is now $750M for the 19–21 biennium.

This is clearly a NTIB issue and won’t be decided until budget proposals are released. For more on the SEBB, read this blog post. Take particular of the narrative on TAB 10 of the January meeting and then the report on the meeting on March 7th. Briefly stated, employees who work a minimum of 180 hours/year have the right to organize and bargain for the same insurance benefits as those that work or are anticipated to work 630 hours. PSE indicated they are preparing for negotiations already.

Other Bills That May Have Fiscal/Hr Impacts For Districts:

HB 1813 | Incorporating the costs of employee health benefits into school district contracts for pupil transportation. This bill has been placed on second reading in the House.

SSHB 1087 concerns long-term services and supports. The bills digest reads in part: “Addresses alternative funding for long-term care access. States that the creation of a long-term care insurance benefit of an established dollar amount per day for eligible employees, paid through an employee payroll premium, is in the best interest of the state.” This would create an optional employee paid premium that would help cover long term care coverage for an employee. It certainly will create additional work/monitoring for a school business office. SSHB 1087 passed the House 63–33 and has been sent to the Senate.

SSB 5449/SHB 1399 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. SB 5449 has been advanced to second reading in the Senate. SHB 1399 passed the House, 71–23 and has been sent to the Senate.

Meanwhile, the currents continue to carry everyone along as the parties attempt to navigate the stream.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

The SEB Board held an all-day meeting (its 15th) covering a wide range of issues. The important sections are referenced below in terms of the TAB number in which the content was presented. They posted the agenda and presentation materials on their website.

Under the enabling legislation and now in RCW 41.05.011(22), school districts, ESD’s and charter schools are now referred to as a “school employees benefit board organization.” Numerous references are made using that term.

A reminder that rule making is scheduled to be completed by October 1, which coincides with when on-line enrollment is scheduled to begin for the January 1, 2020 start of this model.

TAB 5 is a detailed presentation on the newly established ‘not to exceed’ funding rate for medical, dental, and vision insurance. The actual insurance premium rates have not yet been formally set, so their figures are the maximum projected costs. The Governor’s projected rate of $1,174 has now been reduced to $1,114. So, the projected cost to the state’s general fund went from $860 million in the Governor’s budget to $750 million. So, the good news is that projected general fund costs have decreased by $140+ million; the bad news is that legislators need to find $750 million in the budget to fund SEBB. (Not to mention, the approximate $250+ million projected costs to districts to cover the unfunded staff.)

As pointed out by HCA staff, if the SEBB funding rate is set lower than the $1,114, that doesn’t mean SEBB is underfunded. The Legislature can change some assumptions such as granting a longer time to repay the loans made to the HCA to fund the SEBB implementation, or spread out the length of time to build reserves. It is quite possible that the Legislature in order to lower the general fund costs may well try some ‘creative’ accounting maneuvers like these. Time will tell.

The new figure shows a doubling of the administrative cost from $16 to $32 because the HCA will need an additional loan to carry their costs to administer and pay claims until they have developed a cash reserve. The employer medical contribution (EMC) and the K–12 remittance did decrease. (From $616 to $578 medical; and $77 to $67 for remittance.)

January, 2020 thru June will show actuals and the HCA will look at the funding rate for 2021 to see if the premiums need to change based on real usage and claims history.

A chart on page 4 under Tab 5 shows employer/employee projected costs for Uniform Medical Plan (UMP). A reminder that the SEBB UMP Achieve 2 plan is the base upon which the EMC is set. One could choose a plan that is richer in benefit coverages or less rich. One’s choice will determine the out of pocket cost. The employer EMC amount does not change.

TAB 6 has a number of policy resolutions. As background, RCW 41.05.740(6)(e) states that the school employees’ benefits board shall establish terms and conditions for a school employees’ benefits board organization to have the ability to locally negotiate eligibility criteria for a school employee who is anticipated to work less than six hundred thirty hours in a school year.

Three resolutions of import are:

(A) Resolved that, a SEBB organization engaging in local negotiations regarding eligibility for school employees under RCW 41.05.740(6)(e) must offer all of, and only, the following SEBB benefits to school employees and their dependents:

• Medical (includes the wellness incentive program);
• Dental;
• Vision;
• Basic Life; and
• Basic AD&D.

(B) Resolved that, a SEBB organization engaging in local negotiations regarding eligibility for school employees under RCW 41.05.740(6)(e) shall negotiate within the range of anticipated to work hours described below:

• No less than 180 hours per school year; and 
• no more than the threshold to meet the SEB Board’s eligibility established pursuant to RCW 41.05.740(6)(d).

(C) Resolved that, a SEBB Organization must contribute:

• The employer medical contribution (EMC) used for a RCW 41.05.740(6)(d) school employee multiplied by the applicable tier;
• 100% of the monthly premium, for all tiers, for the dental and vision plans as selected by the school employee;
• 100% of the monthly premium for the basic life and basic AD&D benefits;
• 100% of the monthly administration fee as charged by HCA; and
• 100% of the monthly K–12 remittance fee.

Three members of the SEB Board voted against these resolutions. One member wanted a delay to get feedback from school officials on the effect of these resolutions, (particularly ‘B’ above.) WASA testified in opposition. All three resolutions passed showing the strong labor support on the Board.

The net effect of this is that employee groups could bargain with districts and claim close to the same benefits as those employees who work 630 hours or more. As one board member indicated, an employee earning $36,000/year ($20/hour times 180 hours) could then have thousands of dollars’ worth of benefits. Other members including staff did point out that districts negotiate this benefit and could deny it. But, yeah, how successful was the last round of negotiations with union groups who threatened strikes, school delays, etc.? The bottom line is that districts should be prepared for negotiating with all employees.

As an FYI, the HCA/ERB staff meet monthly with representatives from the super coalition (labor groups) and WASBO officials to discuss these resolutions and get their reactions/suggestions. Staff did not indicate any suggestions/reactions from these groups during the presentation.

TAB 7 was a presentation on COBRA coverage, eligibility and length. Of particular import to districts is that after 1/1/2020, all future COBRA issues will be administered by HCA. Districts or third-party entities will no longer have to administer the program.

TAB 11 presented the range of communications that the HCA has developed, is developing, and even disseminating regarding the SEBB program. Check out these materials:

• SEBB Fact Sheets
• Employee and Retirement Benefits for School Employees

The HCA has also begun direct mailing to all K–12 employees.

TAB 13 has charts showing a high-level view of the benefits of the various medical, prescription, dental, life insurance, long-term disability. These are an overview of each of the plan designs and coverage limits.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group

It is never too early to give our students a voice in their education.

Engaging young children as co-researchers recognizes their agency and right to be involved in matters of relevance to them
Preschool children played active roles as researchers in all aspects of a research project focusing on how they experienced different elements in a forest setting. Related discussion addresses the advantages, challenges, and opportunities of four interactive data collection and analysis methods. Green, 2017. Four methods for engaging young children as environmental education researchers.

Welcome to another episode of AWSP’s News, where we discuss:

• our first ever “Walk a Mile in My Shoes” March Madness Campaign,
• registering for the National Association of Elementary School Principals conference in Spokane and our own Summer Conference for a chance to win a prize,
• the key we sent you for Future Educator’s Month,
• five foundational blocks every school should have,
• de-linking graduation and state assessments, and a robust and effective High School and Beyond Plan,
• a reminder to use evaluations to build a culture of growth, and
• calling us for support and questions about principal contracts.

Prefer to read the script? Check it out.