The House passed HF 80 and HF 81 on Jan. 28.  Provisions in those bills:

• Set the SSA rate at 1.25% for regular school aid and each of the state categorical supplements. 
• HF 80 extends the property tax relief provision. The provision increases the state aid commitment by replacing property tax dollars with State dollars, but doesn't increase overall school district budgets. HF 80 was amended on the House floor to include this provision. However, the addition of the property tax relief provision violates an Iowa Code requirement that states: the establishment of the SSA rate be the only subject of the bill.

The House passed HF 139  on Feb. 5. It changes the timing of the establishment of the state percent of growth for SSA. The change would require the General Assembly to set the rates for even numbered fiscal years within 30 days of the Governor’s budget submission, and establish rates for odd numbered fiscal years before the conclusion of that legislative session. This provision would place the setting of  SSA rates in two year cycles, requiring these rates be enacted during odd-numbered legislative session years.

The Senate passed six bills (SF 171, SF 172, SF 173, SF 174, SF 175, SF 176) on Feb. 10. Provisions in those bills:

• Set the SSA rate at 4.0% for regular school aid and each of the state categorical supplements for FY 2016 and FY 2017.
• Extends the property tax relief provision that increases the state aid commitment by replacing property tax dollars with state dollars, but no overall increase to school district budgets, through FY 2017. 

The path to negotiations became a bit more complicated when the Senate chose not to amend the House bills with their own language. Senators adhered to the "one subject" requirement for growth rate bills. Thus, the Senate bills (SF 171-SF 176) will have to go through the House subcommittee, committee, and floor debate process before heading back to the Senate. This process will likely take at least two weeks.

House & Senate Take Different Approaches to Start Date

Three different proposals now exist to govern the establishment of the school calendar. The first proposal, the Governor's directive to the DE, would establish strict guidelines for districts seeking a waiver from the statutory Sept. 1 start date. These guidelines require peer-reviewed evidence that student achievement would be negatively impacted by a later start date.

The House Education Committee approved an amended version of HF 13 on a party line vote. The amendment strikes the bill's original language allowing for local control, and replaces it with a start date of no earlier than Aug. 23. The amendment also includes financial penalties for districts that start earlier, eliminating the waiver process. Questions remain about the impact on those districts that opt for an innovative calendar. Rep. Greg Forristall, (R-Macedonia) indicated the bill will be amended further on the floor to address this concern. IASB is registered in support of the original language in HF 13 but will register opposed to the amended version of the bill when it is re-filed. The bill is on the House debate calendar.

The Senate Education Committee approved SSB 1058 with only three votes opposed. This bill allows school boards to determine their school calendars with no limits from the state. IASB is registered in support of the bill, and it is on the Senate debate calendar.

Advocacy in Action -- What Can Board Members Do?
 

School boards across the state are taking several actions to communicate with legislators and the public, about the negative impact 1.25% supplemental state aid (SSA) will have on their districts. If you have not already done so, please join them in these efforts.

• Pass the board resolution drafted by IASB to express the importance of sufficient funding for public education. Share this resolution with your legislators and local media.  
• Support the efforts of the Public Education Coalition and sign our petition to support sufficient funding for public education. Share this link with others in your community and ask that they stand up for public education.
• Submit a letter to the editor or opinion piece to your local newspapers outlining the impact of 1.25% on your school district, and why sufficient funding to focus on student achievement is important. Letters that have already been published can be found here. These letters provide a good starting point for your own personal story.
• Make contacts with your local legislators and remind them that schools need sufficient funding to meet the needs of their students. To see the impact on your school district or AEA, and to personalize your communication with legislators, you can access the SSA toolkit available on the IASB website. The FY 2016 SSA Comparison Tool allows you to compare different rates and see the impact on your school district while the FY 2016 AEA SSA Tool allows you to measure the impact on AEAs. Contact information and your legislators can be found by using the IASB Legislative Directory page.

If you have any questions or need additional information please  feel free to contact IASB's Government Relations Director, Phil Jeneary at pjeneary@ia-sb.org.