We've done more than just slap a fresh coat of paint on our website; we've torn it down to the studs and built from the ground up. One of the easiest ways to make the most of the new site is to log in and fill out your profile. When you do that, you'll start to see blog posts and events on the homepage tailored just for you.

Like any new construction or remodel, you might find a rough finish here or there. Please send us your feedback. We'd love to hear your thoughts or if you've found something still needing some work.

Website Feedback

In this episode of AWSP News, we discuss:

• National Assistant Principals Week,
• FINAO’s Educator Advisory Board,
• the Governor’s Arts and Heritage Awards,
• a pair of equity conferences,
• the NASSP Digital Principal of the Year nominations,
• some tips from “Dr. Roz,” and
• two great and inspirational ideas (one of them will make your eyes water from our favorite episode ever).

Prefer to read the news? Read the script.

“The future depends on what we do with the present.”

Mahatma Gandhi

Review of 2018 Legislative Session

Pensions, Health Care, SEBB, PEBB, Other……

At the risk of repetition, the legislative session and Governor’s actions have concluded. This was a session that was akin to a sprint to the finish line with the Democrat majorities in both houses pushing many pieces of legislation that had stalled in previous sessions. There were 1,425 new bills introduced and 310 passed during this 60-day session. In 2017, for comparison, for the 193 days of regular and special sessions, 377 bills passed.

So, what happened regarding pensions, health care, financials and other issues?

Pension Related Proposals

Cost of Living Adjustments:

The original SSB 6340would have provided a 2% cost of living adjustment (COLA) to TRS1 and PERS1 members. As part of the final budget, ESSB 6032, the COLA was reduced to 1.5%. This passedboth houses and has been signed by the Governor. It provides certain retirees of Plan 1 of the Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) and Plan 1 of the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) who are receiving a monthly benefit on July 1, 2017, a one-time benefit adjustment of 1.5% multiplied by their monthly benefit, not to exceed $62.50, effective July 2018. (By request of the Select Committee on Pension Policy.)

In a separate part of the budget, the Medicare health insurance benefit subsidy was increased from the current $150/month to $168/month in 2019. This was done to insure the state Health Care Authority (HCA) continues to receive federal funds in excess of $20 million dollars for paying this subsidy/benefit.

SB6210B waspassedby both houses and signed by the Governor. It would allow tribal compact schools the option of participating in Plans 2 or 3 of the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) and Plans 2 or 3 the School Employees’ Retirement System (SERS).(By request of the Select Committee on Pension Policy.)

Retirement Plan Default:

HB 1560would have allowed Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS), School Employees’ Retirement System (SERS) and Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS) members who don’t choose between Plan 2 and Plan 3 within 90 days of initial employment would default into Plan 2. Currently, such members default into Plan 3.  

This bill died. The Chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee indicated she was uncomfortable dealing with this issue until the Select Committee on Pension Policy (SCPP) made a recommendation. 

Substitute Options for early Retirees

There were a number of bills that dealt with expanding opportunities for early retirees to return to work in various substitute capacities. They were consolidated into E4SHB 1827. Thiswas a large bill whereexpanding the current and future educator workforce supply was just one part of the proposal. Although it passed the House, it failed to pass the Senate. Last session(s), the law was changed to allow early retirees to return to school as substitutes under certain conditions. This proposal would have removed both the August 1, 2020 sunset date for that allowance and the directive regarding substitute pay. It would have allowed retirees to return to work in any non-administrative capacity including classified employees such as bus drivers, OT’s, PT’s, etc. 

SB 5310 would have allowed a temporary return to work for early retirees to work as K-12 coaches up to 867 hours. Although it passed the Senate, it made no progress in the House.

School Employee Benefit Board (SEEB)Health Related Proposals

ESSB 6241 This bill was a ‘clean up’ bill requested by the Health Care Authority (HCA). It was amended and a number of changes lobbied by WEA and PSE and clarifications were made. 

A couple of interesting additions included permission to negotiate eligibility for benefits on behalf of employees who work less than 630 hours. (A reminder than any employee expected to work 630 or more hours is eligible.) Another one would allow districts to provide other employee benefits as long as they do not compete with PEBB/SEBB offerings. 

The bill passedboth chambers and has been signed by the Governor.  

It’s important to briefly review EHB 2242 whose title is “Funding fully the state's program of basic education by providing equitable education opportunities through reform of state and local education contributions”. Although it passed and was signed in 2017, it laid out the SEBB conversion requirements and plan. 

An important date approaching concerns bargaining. Section 817(3) reads in part: “…Employee bargaining shall be initiated after July 1, 2018,36 over the dollar amount to be contributed beginning January 1, 2020, on behalf of each employee for health care benefits. Bargaining must subsequently be conducted in even-numbered years between the governor or governor's designee and one coalition of all the exclusive bargaining representatives impacted by benefit purchasing with the school employees' benefits board established in section 801 of this act, consistent with RCW 28A.400.280 and 28A.400.350. The coalition bargaining must follow the model initially established for state employees in RCW 41.80.020. The governor shall submit a request for funds necessary to implement the collective bargaining agreement for the dollar amount to be expended for school employee health benefits, or for legislation necessary to implement the agreement….

The Governor vetoed Section 819 which ends the reporting requirements for school employee health insurance benefits to the Office of the Insurance Commissioner. However, reporting requirements for districts to supply requested information to the HCA in support of making the conversion to a SEBB model remain in effect.

The SEB Board was/is directed to also look at what to do with the aging non-Medicare and Medicare retirees. Section 804(4) reads in part: “ By December 15, 2018, the health care authority, in consultation with the public employees' benefits board and the school employees' benefits board, shall submit to the appropriate committees of the legislature a complete analysis of the most appropriate risk pool for the retired and disabled school employees, to include at a minimum an analysis of the size of the non-Medicare and Medicare retiree enrollment pools, the impacts on cost for state and school district retirees of moving retirees from one pool to another, the need for and the amount of an ongoing retiree subsidy allocation from the active school employees, and the timing and suggested approach for a transition from one risk pool to another…”

ESHB 2408 Relating to preserving access to individual market health care coverage throughout Washington state.For plan years beginning January 1, 2020, a health carrier must offer in the Washington Health Benefit Exchange (Exchange) at least on Silver and one Gold qualified health plans (QHP) in any county in which it offers a fully insured health plan that was approved, on or after the act's effective date, by the Public Employees' Benefits Board (PEBB) or the School Employees' Benefits Board (SEBB). The rates for a PEBB or SEBB-approved health plan may not include the administrative costs or actuarial risks associated with the QHP offered by the carrier. 

This bill has passedboth chambers. 

Post-Session re: Health CarePost-session is when the SEEB process begins in earnest. The Select Committee on Pension Policy will also restart.

Recent meetings have been held by the SEB Board and the PEB Boards. A summary of content with assorted links to the materials is below. Topics and issues discussed have significant consequences to districts. 

Family and Medical Leave

HB 2702 makes technical corrections requested by the Employment Security Department in the Family and Medical Leave Act passed last session. It passed both houses and is awaiting action from the Governor.  

ESHB 1434 Adding the use of shared leave for employees who are sick or temporarily disabled because of pregnancy disability or for the purposes of parental leave to bond with the employee’s newborn, adoptive or foster child. 

The purpose of the Shared Leave Program (Program) is modified to permit employees to help fellow employees who are sick or temporarily disabled due to pregnancy disability or for parental leave. Agency heads may permit employees to receive shared leave for parental leave, or for sickness or temporary disability due to pregnancy disability. Employees are not required to deplete all of their annual and sick leave and may maintain up to 40 hours of annual leave and 40 hours of sick leave in reserve.

For purposes of the Program, "parental leave" is defined as leave to bond and care for a

newborn child after birth or to bond and care for a child after placement for adoption or

foster care, for a period of up to 16 weeks after the birth or placement. "Pregnancy

disability" is defined as a pregnancy-related medical condition or miscarriage.

This bill passedboth houses and has been signed by the Governor. 

Bills that may have fiscal/HR impacts for districts

SHB 2703 Modifies the employment security act to clarify eligibility for education employee unemployment compensation claims for educational employees who have multiple employers. It also modifies the analysis of whether an educational employee has a contract or reasonable assurance of continued employment for purposes of unemployment benefits. This bill may have unintended costs for school districts. 

This bill passed both houses and has been signed by the Governor.

What will the future hold?

Many policy bills proposed during both the long and short sessions failed to advance. However, the key themes represented by them will likely be re-introduced through new legislation during the 2017 Session(s). See selected bill review for proposals that addressed many of these areas.

Moving into speculation on the future, some key activities may occur:

1. Maintaining Democrat majorities in both houses. The Democrats currently hold slim majorities in both houses. The November election will be critical.
2. Reshuffling committee assignments and leadership positions in both houses. Currently eleven (11) Representatives and two (2) Senators have announced retirements. These include some current leaders. The filing period (May 14-18) will be important to monitor.
3. Allowing districts and cooperatives to opt out of the SEBB model and continue their present practices. Efforts during the 2018 session were unsuccessful. However, some districts and brokers will continue the argument.
4. Seeking full funding of the SEBB benefits for districts. The law says that districts are to fund benefits on a per-head basis, rather than the standard pro-rata basis. This will add benefit costs to a district. For example, Wayne Leonard from Mead School District roughly estimated the additional costs to his district were $750,000.
5. Maintaining the recent Medicare health subsidy increase at a minimum. Efforts will be made to get full restoration of the health care insurance benefit for school Medicare retirees back to a minimum of $183/month. It was reduced from that to $150/month in 2011.
6. Working toward putting school retirees in the largest risk pool available which would reduce their current insurance costs.    

1. Changing the current retirement plan default from 3 to 2. The SCPP will be asked to make this recommendation. This change would create savings to the state that range from $43 to $143 million over 25 years.

1. Fundamentally changing the state’s current pension system into a defined contribution model (401-K). Senator Braun, the current ranking Republican on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, (WM) is a leading advocate of making these changes.
2. Merging of the LEOFF 1 and TRS 1 pension funds. This proposal never surfaced during either of the sessions. However, this merger would decrease the unfunded liability in both Plans 1, an issue dear to the Republican leaders.
3. 10)Increasing opportunities for members who retired under the 2008 Early Retirement Factors (ERF) to work in various capacities in a school district beyond the current allowance to substitute teach. 
4. 11)Removing the sunset date allowing the use of ERF members as substitute teachers. 
5. 12)Moving to a state-wide collective bargaining contract for all K-12 employees. (This is a real ‘pie-in-the-sky’ projection.) The statewide SEBB program and bargaining model can be adapted to the wider arena on salaries and other benefits. The current model allowing districts to develop their own salary schedules will lead to disparities and inequalities between districts and regions. 

Selected Financials

ESSB 6032 State Budget

Below are selected financial figures from the adopted supplemental 2018 budget:

                                                         2017- 2018                               2018-2019

Fringe benefit allocation     23.49%                                  23.65%/Allocated Certificated

                                                24.60%                                  24.67%/Allocated Classified 

Insurance Health

Benefit                                               $820                                     $843.97 

Medicare Insurance

Subsidy for Retirees                       $150                                       $168

Retirement Contributions                                       

TRS                                                                                                   13.13%

PERS                                                                                              11.18%

SERS                                                                                                11.58%

(Note: These rates are subject to change. The State Actuary and the Pension Funding Council set these rates yearly. They have yet to meet.)

Substitute Rate                    $151.86                                             $151.86

(4 subs/classroom teacher unit)

Health Care

Carve-out                              $64.07 Begin 9/2017              $71.08 Begin 9/2018

If you have any questions, please feel free to make contact.

Fred Yancey

The Nexus Group LLC

In this episode of AWSP News, we discuss:

• the student walkouts and empowering student voice,
• the Washington State Mental Health Summit,
• a great way to show staff appreciation shared with us by Jostens,
• the recent David Brooks Op-Ed in the New York Times about the integral role of the principal in strong schools,
• a meeting with Washington Roundtable and Challenge Seattle,
• the importance of a professional learning network (PLN), and
• one principal’s equity journey as a result of a strong PLN.

Prefer to read the news? Read the script.

The PEB Board held its monthly meeting March 21, 2018. A short summary follows. A briefing book offers more details.

This report primarily focuses on issues related to retirees, both those who are pre-Medicare eligible and those that are Medicare eligible and choose PEBB insurance as their supplemental health policy.

The most interesting fact that came out of the meeting concerns risk pools. The claims history and demographic make-up of these pools are the primary drivers for rates. This year, for example, the UMP Classic insurance rates (commonly referred to as the “Uniform Medical Plan”) paid by Medicaid retirees increased $55.51/month. Why? Well, two main drivers affected these rates. One, was the increased use and cost of prescription medications (61% of the claims). The other is the fact that the Medicare retirees are in a separate risk pool. (Non-Medicare retirees are in the regular PEBB risk pool.) Clearly, having older members with probable health issues due to aging makes for expensive claim experiences. This rate increase, particularly for those Plan 1 retirees who have not had a cost of living adjustment since 2011, is a hardship. In fact, this increase is a hardship for anyone living on a fixed income. It’s important to remember that Medicare retirees already pay a minimum $105/month for Medicare.

Kaiser Medicare Advantage plan rates are not as volatile since they receive direct dollars from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid which offset any potential rate increase. UMP is self-insured and does not receive Federal dollars, aside from the Retiree Drug Subsidy. (See below)(A reminder that due in December 2018, the School Employee Benefit Board (SEBB) is to make recommendations as to whether the Medicare retirees remain in PEBB or shift to SEBB.)

Some facts regarding enrollments:

• Non-Medicare retirees: 6,700
• Medicare enrollees: 92,603
• Total PEBB Enrollment for Members and Non-Medicare Retirees: 285,772 (2018)

The 2018 Supplemental Budget increased the retiree health insurance subsidy from $150 to $168 beginning January 2019. This was primarily done to ensure that the $20 plus million dollars the Health Care Authority (HCA) for its Retiree Drug Subsidy continues.

What can be done to address the rate increases?

There are many options that the PEB Board could consider. All would require fiscal analysis. Some ideas could include:

1. Change the formulary in the UMP. The Board has some jurisdiction over setting up different parameters of the formulary.
2. Move Medicare eligible retirees into the PEBB risk pool, or the SEBB risk pools to share claim and demographic experiences.
3. Increase the health subsidy for retirees from present $168/month. This recent increase is for 2019 only. After that, without legislative action, the subsidy will revert back to $150/month.
4. Offer more plan and resulting cost options.
5. Discontinue prescription coverage.
6. Offer separate prescription insurance.

Other items of note:

There was a presentation on the NW Prescription Drug Consortium which includes Oregon and Washington entities. This primarily benefits those individuals who do not have prescription coverage and must pay cash for their prescriptions. It is open to enrollment by individuals. It negotiates drug prices and discounts available when using its free Pharmacy Discount Card at participating pharmacies. Discounts range from 20%–80% depending on use of generic or brand name drugs.

Read more for information, including free enrollment.

The last presentation concerned an overview of discount programs available to subscribers and their dependents of PEBB. These include such examples as Silver Sneakers (a Health club discount program available to eligible seniors), vision products, LASIK, alternative medicine treatments, hearing aid products and services and more.

Links to more information: * Kaiser member perks * Public employee plan discounts

The link given at the start of this report contains more detail for those interested. Feel free to contact me if you have further questions.

Fred Yancey
The Nexus Group, LLC

“To boldly go where no man has gone before.”
-Captain Kirk/ Starship Enterprise

The SEBB held an all-day meeting on 3/15/18 that covered a great deal of information including preliminary impacts on the state and local school districts. The caveat is that David Iseminger, the Director of the Employee and Retiree Benefit Division (ERB) stated, “Because this change is new, we are not going to get everything right.” At this point, without enrollment figures, claims history, etc. ERB is involved in making educated guesses with assumptions that may come to be or not.

There was an extensive packet distributed and discussed at the meeting.

View Packet | PDF

So, what is the SEB Board and how do I find out more information?
Check out an overview of the program. Links to a Q & A section would be a good place for an orientation. There is an option on that page to also sign up for electronic notices of actions taken by SEB Board.

A reminder that on January 1, 2020, all school employee health, vision, dental, life insurance, short and long-term disability and accidental death/dismemberment plans will be shifted to and purchased from the SEB Board.

What legislation established this?
Two pieces of legislation laid out this change.

1. EHB 2242, effective 10/19/2017, laid out the basics of the program.
2. ESSB 6241, which is currently before the Governor for action passed during the recent legislative session. This was agency request legislation to clarify and make some substantive and also technical changes to the original legislation. The Legislature did make additional changes to the bill during session that were not originally proposed by the Health Care Authority (HCA), e.g. Sections 33/34.

What are the plans and costs of the various plans?
Based on input from the SEB Board, HCA will be issuing a Request for Information (RFI) from interested carriers for non-binding cost and plan design proposals for fully insured medical plans. These responses are due back to HCA in late April the so that SEB Board can have a rough idea of potential costs and the ‘richness’ of various plans as they move to eventually establish the parameters of the plans they wish to offer to school employees. A reminder that the out of pocket cost for full family coverage cannot exceed three times the premium out of pocket cost for individuals.

What impact on school districts and on the state budget would this change have?
First, it is important to remember the caveat given in the introductory paragraph.

The legislation mandates that all employees who are anticipated to work 630 hours or more will qualify for benefits. These hours can be accumulated throughout the year or if an employee is expected/anticipated to meet the minimum, he/she would qualify. For example, a substitute who transitions to become a long-term substitute may qualify at some point in the school year.

Questions were raised over employees working supplemental contracts such as advisers, coaches. Do they need to track time that may result in their qualifying for benefit? What about retirees who are already in PEBB who may exceed 630 hours. Do they qualify for SEBB benefits also? How does the state adjust benefit payments to districts as new ‘qualifiers’ come onto the payroll? Answers to these questions are yet to come.

The most impactful change is that the legislation (See Section 33 of ESSB 6241) changes present district practices of pro-rating benefits based on one’s percentage of FTE-ness to a head count system. Full benefits are offered to all qualified employees based on head count, not FTE status. Tab 7 in the board packet shows in 2016–17 there were 94,400 state funded FTE’s in school districts; 15,500 additional FTE’s were locally funded.

Tab 8 of the board packet presented by Megan Atkinson, CFO, hypothesizes that adjusting state funding for a headcount basis increases the state contribution in excess of $200 million, and perhaps as high as $300 million. District excess costs would be in the neighborhood of $30-$40 million. Wayne Leonard, member of the board from Mead School District estimates the excess cost to Mead would be $750,000. The recently adopted supplemental budget also allocated $28 million to the HCA for administrative costs to implement this transition. (Staff, IT infrastructure, etc.) These dollars will be repaid to the state with interest by school districts. The mechanics of this are still unknown.

Are there other items of note?
A review of the packet will cover the entire agenda. This summary report is just some highlights. One interesting resolution by the board concerns dependent eligibility. Under the SEBB program, domestic partners are eligible dependents only if they are registered with the state. For example, same sex couples must be married for the spouse to have dependent eligibility (unless at least one of them is over 62 in which case they could be in a state-registered domestic partnership with the Secretary of State’s Office. This was pointed out is different than many current district practices. For example, some districts allow for a signed declaration that two people of the opposite or same sex are in a domestic partnership. The board is also looking at when coverage would become effective and the length of the period for electing benefits. The Board may be voting on these policy topics at its April 30th, 2018 meeting. See tabs 10 and 11.

So, what’s next?
EHB 2242: Part VIII: Starting in Sections 801–819 lays out the process. Beginning in July, 2018, and in even numbered years, negotiations with the Governor’s office and “one coalition of all the exclusive bargaining representatives impacted by benefit purchasing with SEBB” will begin to determine/negotiate employee/employer costs. The current state employee contract has an 85/15 split on benefits with employees responsible for 15% of the benefit costs. This split, however, has been negotiated by the state employee representatives and the Governor’s office and is not valid for SEBB members. Negotiations have yet to establish any employee/employer contributions.

This is just a summary. As indicated earlier, a review of the board packet materials would be wise and a refresher on the legislation may also be in order.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.

Fred Yancey
Nexus Group, LLC

In this episode of AWSP News, we discuss:

• how to handle student walkouts in response to the Florida shooting,
• the 3rd annual Equity Conference on May 23rd,
• a great definition of cultural competence,
• OSPI’s ESSA Implementation 101 webinars and new approach to school improvement,
• participating in the Washington State Leadership Academy,
• the Coble Scholarship for under-represented educational leaders,
• WASA’s new executive director, how to showcase your leadership in your evaluation,
• how Thrive Washington suports kids and families from birth to five, and
• our 3rd annual principal appreciation night with the Tacoma Rainiers.

Prefer to read the news? Read the script.

1. Important, but not urgent,
2. Urgent and important
3. Urgent but not important
4. Not important and not urgent

The University of Washington’s College of Education wrote a great story about our Deputy Executive Director, Scott Seaman. Scott is in the last year of his Leadership for Learning (EdD) program at the UW. He’ll become our next Executive Director in September 2018 when our beloved Gary Kipp retires. The article provides some great background about Scott’s journey.

Four years ago, Seaman made the tough decision to leave the school where he had spent the majority of his career to join the Association of Washington School Principals (AWSP) as its deputy executive director and director of high school programs.

“I look at that choice as a decision that was pivotal for my career,” he said. “I left the classroom to have a bigger impact on the school. Eventually, I would leave the school to have a bigger impact on the state.”

In his new role at AWSP, Seaman was responsible for providing resources and support for principals of K–12 schools in all of Washington’s 295 districts.

To learn more about Scott, check out the rest of the article.

We’ve all been there. We’ve all sat in professional learning settings where the audience is completely disengaged, clearing emails and/or surfing the web. In fact, we’ve all developed coping and exit strategies for painful adult learning settings. And, you can’t tell me you haven’t faked an important phone call and walked out of some sort of profession learning setting. 

Here’s the big question: Why is that? How can educators in charge of inspiring the minds of our kids, not put the same energy into inspiring each other? Why is it that adults are the worst learners? Is it the fault of the presenter or the learner? How have we created this mindset over time that adult learning has to be teacher torture, painful sit-n-get, and death by PowerPoint? 

Enough is enough. It’s time to revolutionize adult learning. It’s time to bring new energy, mindset and research-based strategies to adult learning settings. And, this is crazy talk now, but, it’s time to put the same energy we expect teachers to put into their classes into the professional learning that principals provide for teachers, principals provide for each other, and central office leaders provide for principals. We need to put greater emphasis into planning and leading powerful adult learning for each other if we ever expect to impact student learning.

So, where do you start? Begin with reflection. Who were some of your favorite teachers you had as a student? Who are some of your favorite teachers you observe now? What presenters have you seen recently that keep an entire room engaged? What is it about these teachers that makes them so effective? High energy, enthusiasm, creativity, sense of humor, high expectations, unconditional love, quick transitions, and most importantly, less of you and more of them. These great leaders of adult learning tend to follow the simple 70-30 Rule of presenting. The audience is engaging with each other 70% of the time and only listening to the presenter 30% of the time.

You’ve got to be willing to let go. You provide the vision, structure, purpose, space, food and fun, then let them lead their own learning with each other. Let them wrestle with relevant problems of practice related to their contexts. Provide the gift of time to tackle these problems of practice with each other by developing and testing theories of action in a safe environment. Adults need time to engage with each other. They don’t need time to sit and listen to someone reading words off the screen.

Thanks to the insight and feedback from principals who serve on the AWSP Professional Learning Committee, we have developed the AWSP Theory of Adult Learning. These principles are now used exclusively in all of our workshops, conferences and seminars and serve as our expectations of all adults (presenters and participants) who appearin our adult learning settings.

Learning Happens when adults…

• Access expertise inside and outside of the group
• Participate in authentic activities with the group
• Practice with relevant Problems of Practice
• Engage (formally and informally) with colleagues
• Apply new learning to professional contexts
• Reflect on leadership and new learnings

We recommend that you adopt this Theory of Adult Learning for your own building. Set the tone for what adult learning will look and feel like in your school or district. Call out the fact that adults tend to be the worst learners and change that mindset by changing how you lead learning yourself. Start by asking your audience of learners what they think the AWSP Theory of Adult Learning means for them as a learner and for you as the leader. 

Finally, no one ever said that adult learning has to be boring and void of fun. We are no different than the kids we serve. We deserve to laugh and smile while we learn. We deserve games, music, celebrations, prizes and raffle drawings. Our work is important and crucial to the future success of all kids and it’s your job to lead the professional learning for you and those around you. How will you be remembered as an instructional leader? How will your learners describe the professional learning you lead? Will they sit up front or take a seat in the back corner by the door?

< Back to blog archive
Posted by Caroline Brumfield

Beyond the Bake Sale: Storing Boosters Money in the School Safe

Q. Can we temporarily store money that belongs to the Boosters in the school safe?

A. You cannot store any money in the school safe that is not public money. The Boosters' money is private. This would be considered using a public resource for the advantage of a private business. I have heard stories of auditors finding money in the school safe labeled “Boosters” or “PTO/PTA” and require that the money be placed into ASB.

< Back to blog archive

< Back to blog archive

< Back to blog archive
Posted by Jerry Bender

Retirement and Health Benefits

This week’s report is particularly difficult. There are major pieces of legislation that have only recently been introduced and have very complex elements. They all deal with the McCleary decision and meeting the directives of the Supreme Court. The Governor, the House Democrats, the Senate Democrats, the Senate Republicans, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction all have introduced ‘plans’ to meet and ‘fund’ the Constitutional demands to provide a general and uniform system of public schools by making ample provision for the education of all children. The air in Olympia is filled with the sounds of dueling banjos and everyone is waiting for deliverance and waiting and waiting.

The most detailed proposal dealing with teacher compensation, collective bargaining, and levies is SB 6109 sponsored by Senators Dammeier, Litzow, Hill, Schoesler, Braun, and others.

This bill has three major sections: Compensation, School District Excess Levies and Levy Equalization, and State Property Tax Offset. In the section on compensation, it lays out a consolidated health model for all school districts and ESD’s to replace the current fragmented system of insurance offerings among the 295 local school districts and the nine ESD’s. It incorporates an earlier Senate bill (SB 5976) that dealt solely with insurance consolidation. The Senate Republicans, some key Democrats, and State Superintendent Dorn believe that consolidating health insurance will be more efficient and more affordable, so it is likely that such a reform may pass this session within or outside of this bill.

The health care sections (114–135) of the bill are very complex. This report will just hit some highlights. This is not a detailed breakdown and analysis of the bill. This report will be long enough. For a more detailed look, see the links provided below.

The link to the bill as proposed is: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6109&year=2015.

The link to the narrative bill report is: http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015–16/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/6109%20SBA%20WM%2015.pdf.

A little history is in order. In 2012, ESSB 5940 regarding school employee benefits passed. It directed the Office of the Insurance Commissioner (OIC) and the Health Care Authority (HCA) to gather and analyze data and to:

That final report is due June 1, 2015.

The Legislature and Senate Republicans obviously can’t wait, so this session they proposed SB 5976 and then incorporated it into this recent SB 6109. Beginning January 1, 2017, all school districts must participate in the SEBB (School Employee Benefit Board) program including districts and employees currently participating in the Public Employees Benefit Board (PEBB) program, and health benefits for all school district and educational service district employees are merged into a single, community-rated risk pool with separate rates apart from the risk pool for PEBB health benefits. Prior to that time, school districts and ESD’s will pay a PEBB composite rate for insurance offerings.

School retirees and state retirees continue to participate in PEBB health plans. By December 15, 2015, the Health Care Authority (HCA), in consultation with the PEBB and SEBB, must complete an analysis of the most appropriate risk pool for retired school employees.

Currently, state employees, many school retirees, and a few schools purchase their insurance through PEBB which is chaired by director of the state Health Care Authority (HCA). This bill proposes to establish a similar model under HCA and create a nine-member School Employees’ Benefits Board (SEBB) which must be in place by October 1, 2015. By September 30, 2015, the Governor must appoint eight members to the board: two members from associations representing certificated employees, two members from associations representing classified employees, and four members with expertise in employee health benefits policy and administration. The HCA director or designee is chair of the SEBB.

The SEBB has multiple responsibilities, including:

There are many more details in the proposals. For example, all collective bargaining agreements entered into between school districts and organizations representing certificated or classified school district employees must be consistent with the changes made by the bill. Contracts will run from July 1 through June 30th.

Annuity Plans: School districts that offer tax deferred annuity plans to their employees may not make employer contributions to the plans beginning as of September 1, 2017.

Pooling: The present practice of pooling of benefits is eliminated. (Section 131)

Accounting: School districts must provide separate accounting of state, federal, and local revenues and expenditures, and basic education and non-basic education expenditures.

Local School District Fund Accounts: School districts must establish a local revenue fund for the purpose of accounting for the financial operations of a school district that are paid for from local revenue.

Reporting: Districts and benefit providers are to report data beginning on 12/1/15 to HCA and 12/31/2015 to OIC. Further data is also due to HCA/SEBB 4/1/16.

Collective Bargaining: The scope of the medical, dental, vision, and other basic insurance benefits provided for school employees is removed from local bargaining. Current provisions dealing with school district pooling arrangements established by bargaining units are abolished. Beginning January 1, 2017, school district contributions to employee insurance purchased through the HCA must conform to requirements established by HCA statutes and the SEBB. All collective bargaining agreements entered into between school districts and organizations representing certificated or classified school district employees must be consistent with the changes made by the bill. After April 1, 2016, bargaining over the dollar amount expended for school employee health care benefits beginning July 1, 2017, must be conducted between the Governor or the Governor’s designee and one coalition (the definition of said ‘coalition’ is not detailed in the bill) of all the exclusive bargaining representatives impacted by benefits purchasing with the SEBB. The agreement is subject to acceptance or rejection by the Legislature.

There is much more to this bill than this brief overview. Even the bill report is a broad report. But this gives a flavor. It truly represents a real shift in past practices. It is scheduled for a hearing Friday, April 17 at 8:00 AM before the Senate Ways and Means Committee.

Fred Yancey 
fyancey@comcast.net
The Nexus Group

< Back to blog archive

< Back to blog archive

Leading a Commitment to Graduate

Posted by Scott Seaman on September 2, 2014 at 04:00:36 PM

In just her second year as principal at Steilacoom High School, Deb Hay leads the charge of shaping the culture of her school as she welcomes the Class of 2018 into SHS. There are many transitional programs and activities that principals are using to welcome new students. Deb is taking those activities to the next level by challenging her students to make a commitment to graduate. 

On August 27, students started their morning with welcome messages from current seniors, SHS staff and district Superintendent Kathi Weight. After student-led tours and many other connection activities, the 240+ incoming 9th grade students gathered in the school auditorium. Deb then took center stage and challenged every single student to make a commitment to graduate in 2018. 

After some school cheers, motivational videos and messages from student leaders, students were issued the next challenge. Deb asked each student to get ready to stand in front of their peers and verbally and symbolically make a commitment to graduate prepared for the next phase of life. Student leaders and staff had the system timed out perfectly for students to exit the auditorium from one door as a timid incoming 9th grader and enter through another as a proud future graduate wearing a graduation gown in SHS Sentinel colors. Each student then walked across the stage and shook hands with the school’s leadership team and superintendent. 

After the gauntlet of handshakes and greetings, each student stood at the microphone, said their name and signed the Class of 2018 Commitment to Graduate banner. One other magic touch - instead of a fake diploma, every single student received a post card from a Class of 2014 SHS grad encouraging students to dream big and make it happen. SHS Pay it Forward Legacy! 

If you’ve got great traditions like this that we all can learn from, don’t be shy. Share your best practices with us so we can share them with the world! Leave a comment below or email Scott Seaman.

< Back to blog archive

< Back to blog archive