On Tuesday, May 8, 2012, a number of pension bills were introduced in the Ohio Senate and began hearings in the Senate Insurance, Commerce and Labor Committee.  The bills were jointly sponsored by Senate President Tom Niehaus (R-New Richmond) and Senate Minority Leader Eric Kearney (D-Cincinnati).  The legislation is drafted based on the most recent plans passed by the STRS, SERS and OPERS Boards.  These plans were designed in order to improve the long-term solvency of the pension systems.

The plans were designed to secure the defined benefit pension system that our members rely on for economic security in retirement as well as maintain access to meaningful health care benefits for current and future retirees.  They each present difficult changes that impact our members, particularly with STRS.  However, the funding situation with STRS is critical.  The funding period (the amount of time needed to pay off the unfunded liabilities of the plan) is infinite.  Simply put, without changes of this magnitude, STRS will eventually run out of money to provide benefits.  The proposed changes are likely to only get more costly with the passage of time.  For these reasons, OEA supports the bills as introduced.  On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, OEA Vice President William Leibensperger testified as a proponent for Senate Bill 341, 342, and 343.

Due to the bipartisan and stakeholder support, bills are expected to move quickly through the Ohio Senate.  However, the Ohio House has indicated they will not act on pension legislation until after a study commissioned by the Ohio Retirement Study Council.  That study is not anticipated to be completed until July which may move final action on this legislation until after the November election.
Below is a brief synopsis of the major provisions of the plans adopted by each retirement system:

STRS (Senate Bill 342)

Retirement Eligibility:  Retirement with full benefits at age 65 with at least 5 years of service is maintained.  Otherwise, beginning in 2015, the years of service needed to retire with full benefits gradually increases from 30 years to 35 years.  After 2026, a member would need to have 35 years of service and be at least 60 years old for full benefits.

For early retirements, members could retire at age 60 with 5 years of service or with 30 years of service at any age.  However, members who choose to retire early would have their benefits actuarially reduced.  

Contributions:  The Board-adopted plan calls for gradually increasing employee contributions from 10% to 14% of pay. 

Cost-of-Living Allowance (COLA):  The bill would lower the COLA rate for current retirees from 3% to 2% and have a freeze on increases for FY 2014.  For future retirees (beginning August 2013), the COLA rate would also be 2%, but the first increase would come after 60 months of retirement.

Benefit Formula and Final Average Salary:  Beginning in 2015, the formula would be 2.2% for each year of service and final average salary would be calculated on five years of salary rather than three.  Those who are eligible to retire by July 1, 2015 but elect to continue working could receive no less of a base benefit than current law allows. 

SERS (Senate Bill 341)

The SERS plan does not call for changes in contribution rates, COLA, formula or final average salary.   The current fiscal condition of SERS does not warrant such changes.  This is important due to the low wages of many educational support personnel and the low monthly pensions of the average SERS retiree. 

Retirement Eligibility:  Beginning August 1 2017, retirement eligibility with full benefits would be 10 years of service at age 67 or 30 years of service at age 57.  A member could retire early with 10 years of service at age 62 or 25 years of service at age 60.  Early retirements would be subject to an actuarial reduction of benefits.   Members who would have at least 25 years of service by 2017 are grandfathered from these changes.

OPERS (Senate Bill 343)

The changes proposed are designed in order to continue contributions toward a meaningful health care benefit for current and future OPERS retirees.  The OPERS plan divides employees into three groups.  Those who are within five years of retirement (Group A) or between five and ten years from retirement (Group B) are grandfathered from some of the proposed changes.

Retirement Eligibility:  For Group B, eligibility for full benefits increases to 31 years of service and age 52, 32 years of service at any age, or five years of service at age 66.  For Group C, eligibility for full benefits increases to 32 years of service at age 55 or five years of service at age 67.  For both groups, early retirements result in actuarially reduced benefits.  Group A is grandfathered into current eligibility requirements.

Formula and FAS:  For Group C only, the formula would be 2.2% for the first 35 years and 2.5% for each year thereafter with FAS calculated on the five highest years of salary (up from 3).

Cost-of-Living Allowance (COLA):  The COLA would remain 3% for current retirees.  For those retiring after the bill’s effective date (Groups A, B and C) the COLA would be the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) capped at 3%.
Senate Bill 316 Clears Ohio Senate

On Tuesday, May 8, 2012, the Senate Education Committee amended and unanimously voted out Senate Bill 316.  The bill contains many education-related issues for mid-biennium review.  The following day, the bill passed the Ohio Senate by a vote of 30-2.

OEA stand-alone amendments removing the more restrictive collective bargaining limitation for teacher evaluation, eliminating third-party evaluators, providing for additional flexibility under the teacher evaluation framework for teachers labeled “proficient,” establishing a separate teacher evaluation framework for teachers who work for County Boards of Developmental Disabilities and applying the teacher evaluation framework to all charter school teachers were tabled mostly on party lines.  Below is a summary of the major changes to the as-introduced version of Senate Bill 316.

Teacher Evaluation

• Adds language explicitly allowing teacher evaluations to be conducted by persons designated in a peer review agreement (PAR) entered into by a school district and its teachers. 
• Specifies that substitute teachers are not subject to the requirement to undergo annual teacher evaluations.
• Excludes the following students when calculating student academic growth for the purpose of teacher evaluations: (1) Students with 60 or more excused or unexcused absences for the school year; and (2) Students who are “habitual truants.”  (Under current law, a habitual truant has unexcused absences of 5 or more consecutive days, 7 or more days in a month, or 12 or more days in a school year.)

Teacher Re-testing and Professional Development

• Repeals current law requiring each teacher of a core subject area in a building that is ranked in the lowest 10% of all public schools to take and pass a content knowledge exam.
• Requires the employer to develop a professional improvement plan for a teacher rated “ineffective” on an evaluation for the first time.  Requires a teacher that is rated “ineffective” on the next evaluation after the development of a plan to complete at least 12 hours of in-service professional development at the teacher’s expense. 
• Permits an employer, at its own expense, to require a teacher to take one or more exams of content knowledge selected by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) in addition to completing the professional development.
• Permits an employer to terminate a teacher if the teacher does not complete the professional development or content knowledge exam, received an “ineffective “ rating on the teacher’s next evaluation after professional development or fails the exam.
 
Nonrenewal of Teacher and Administrator Contracts

• Extends the deadlines for a school district or Educational Service Center (ESC) to notify a teacher or administrator that the person’s contract will not be renewed for the following school year, as follows: (1) from April 30 to June 1 in the case of teachers; and (2) from March 31 to June 1 in the case of assistant superintendents, principals, assistant principals, business managers, supervisors and other administrators. 
• Extends the deadline from June 1 to June 15 for a teacher or administrator to notify a school district or ESC that the person  is declining reemployment, in cases where the person is automatically reemployed due to the district’s or ESC’s failure to comply with the statutory nonrenewal procedures. 

Report Cards

• Delays for one year the new letter grade report card until the 2012-2013 school year.
• Establishes a task force of legislators, the Superintendent of Public Instruction and president of the State Board of Education to make legislative recommendations by October 1, 2012 for a new rating and report card system. 
• Requires ODE by January 31, 2012 to estimate the rating each district or school would have been assigned for the 2011-2012 school year under the task force’s recommended letter grade rating system if that system were in effect. 
• Adds career-technical planning districts (CTPD) to the bill’s requirement for a separate academic performance report card for joint vocational school districts (JVSD) to be first issued by September 1, 2013. 

Data on Graduates of Teacher Preparation Programs

• Replaces the bill’s requirement that school districts annually report to the Department of Education the names and evaluation ratings of their teachers with a requirement that districts and schools report the number of teachers receiving each evaluation rating aggregated by the teacher preparation programs from which the teachers graduated and graduation year. 
• Prohibits the guidelines for reporting from permitting or requiring the reporting of teachers’ names or other personally identifiable information. 
• Extends the date, from December 31, 2012 to December 31, 2014, by which the Board of Regents must commence annually reporting the number and percentage of all graduates of teacher preparation programs who were rated at each of the performance levels.

Third Grade Reading Guarantee

• Replaces the bill’s provisions to the third grade reading guarantee with a requirement beginning in the 2013-2014 school year (when this year’s  first-graders will be entering third grade), that prohibits promotion  to fourth grade of a student scoring in the “limited” range on the third-grade reading achievement assessment  with the following exceptions:
o Limited English proficient students who have been  enrolled in U.S. schools for less than two full school years and  have had less than two years of instruction in an English as a  second language program;
o Special education students whose IEPs exempt them from  retention under the third-grade guarantee, or whose IEPs or 504 Plans show that they have received intensive remediation in  reading for more than two years but still demonstrate a deficiency  in reading;
o Students who, as determined by their principals, either  (1) demonstrate an acceptable level of performance on an  alternative reading assessment, or (2) demonstrate through a  student portfolio mastery of the state English language arts  standards for third grade; and
o Students who have received intensive remediation in reading for at least two years but still demonstrate a deficiency in reading and were previously retained in any of grades K to 3, as long as the student continues to receive intensive reading instruction in fourth grade. 
• Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, requires each school district, community or STEM school to administer the state-developed diagnostic assessments in English language arts, or a comparable tool approved by the Department of Education, to all students in grades K- 3 by September 30 of each school year to identify students reading below grade level.
• Requires a district, community or STEM school to  do the following for each student identified as reading below  grade level: Notify the parent or guardian of the identification, the current services being provided to the student, proposed  supplemental instructional services, potential retention if  the student attains a “limited” score on the reading achievement  assessment in the third grade and provision for intensive reading instruction immediately following identification of a reading deficiency.
• Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, requires a  district, community  or STEM school to (1) provide intensive remediation  services until the student is able to read at grade level that address the student’s areas of deficiencies, including at least 90  minutes of uninterrupted reading instruction and other strategies that may include small group instruction, reduced teacher-student  ratios, more frequent progress monitoring, tutoring or mentoring,  transition classes, extended school day, week or year, and summer  reading camps; (2) establish a policy for mid-year promotion of a  student who demonstrates that the student is reading at or above  grade level; (3) provide each student with a high-performing  teacher.
• Makes permissive instead of requiring a school district to provide alternative providers for remediation.
• Requires a district, community or STEM school to develop a reading improvement and monitoring plan for each student in grades K-3 who is reading below grade level.
• Beginning in the 2013-2014 school year, requires that  students who have a reading improvement and  monitoring plan and  are entering third grade be assigned to a teacher who either has  passed a “rigorous test of principles of  scientifically-based  reading instruction” approved by the State Board of Education or  has a reading endorsement on the teacher’s license.
• Requires each district, community or STEM school to report annually to the Department of Education about its implementation and compliance with the requirements of the third grade guarantee.
• Eliminates the requirement that the remediation provided to students who are reading below grade level include instruction in phonetics and specifies instead that the instruction must be targeted at the student’s reading deficiencies.
• Eliminates the requirement that summer remediation be provided in a school or community center and not on an at-home basis.

Third Grade Reading Guarantee Funding

• Establishes Fund 7018 in the Lottery Profits Education Reserve Fund for the Third Grade Reading Guarantee with a FY 2013 appropriation of $13 million.  Requires this  appropriation to be used to make competitive grants to school  districts and community schools to support reading intervention  efforts  that assist students in meeting the third grade reading  guarantee.
• Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Governor’s Director of 21st Century Education to report to the Governor and the General Assembly, by December 31, 2012, on the ability of the Department of Education to reprioritize state and federal funds appropriated or allocated to the Department in order to identify additional funds that may be used to support the assessments and interventions associated with the third grade reading guarantee. 

Other

• Requires the Ohio Department of Education (ODE), in consultation with the State Board of Education and other entities, to develop and submit to the Governor and Ohio General Assembly legislative recommendations by March 31, 2013 regarding reading readiness for individuals from birth through the third grade.
• Amends law to make schools’ implementation of the body mass index (BMI) screenings optional.
• Specifies that the study of history and government (other than American history and American government) may count toward the two units of social studies required in grades 9 through 12 for graduation from high school. 
OEA Analysis: Mayor Jackson’s Cleveland Plan Legislation (HB 525/SB 335)

Only applies to a “municipal school district”:  Under continuing law, the Cleveland Municipal School District is the only “municipal school district” in Ohio (RC 3311.71).

Performance-based salary schedules:  The board of education of a municipal school district must annually adopt separate, differentiated salary schedules for teachers and principals based upon performance.  Performance is measured by considering all of the following: 1) level of license held; 2) whether the teacher or principal is a “highly qualified” teacher; 3) ratings received by the teacher or principal on performance evaluations (includes 50% student growth measure); 4) additional compensation for teachers or principals who agree to perform duties not contracted for under a supplemental contract that the board determines warrant additional compensation, including, but not limited to: a) assignment to a building eligible for Title I funding; b) assignment to a building in “school improvement” status; c) teaching a grade level or subject where the board has identified a shortage; or teaching in a “hard to staff” school as determined by the board (RC 3311.78).

• Salary adjustments:  The board shall annually review the salary of each teacher and principal and may increase salary based on: 1) performance (based on level of licensure, highly qualified status or ratings on evaluations); 2) additional duties a teacher or principal agrees to perform (not contracted for under a supplemental contract).  The board may decrease a teacher’s or principal’s salary based on:  performance of fewer or different additional duties (on which additional compensation was based but not contracted for under a supplemental contract) in the school year for which the salary is decreased. 

Evaluations:  Not later than July 1, 2013, the board of education, in consultation with teachers employed by the board, shall adopt a standards-based teacher evaluation policy that conforms to the framework for evaluation of teachers developed by the State Board of Education under ORC 3319.112 (50% student growth measures).  The board, in consultation with teachers employed by the board, shall adopt procedures under which a teacher may request a review and revision of the results (RC 3311.80).

Teacher assignment:  A candidate for an open teaching position at a school shall be interviewed by a building level team comprised of the building principal, a representative of the district teachers’ labor organization, a parent, a staff member in the same job classification as the posted position, and any other members mutually agreed upon by the principal and the labor organization representative.  A recommendation shall be made to the district CEO after considering specified credentials (e.g. evaluations, experience teaching subject area and specialized training) and shall not use seniority or continuing contract status as the primary factor in determining any teacher’s assignment.  If it becomes necessary to voluntarily or involuntarily assign, reassign, or transfer a teacher to promote the best interests of the district, the CEO shall first meet with the teacher, the principals of the affected buildings, and a representative of the teachers’ labor organization.  The board and the teacher’s labor organization shall negotiate regarding the implementation of the teacher assignment statute (RC 3311.79).

Reduction in teachers:  In addition to the existing statutory reasons for a reduction in teachers, a municipal school district is authorized to make a reduction in teachers for “academic reasons resulting in consolidation of teaching positions, duties, or functions or resulting in changes in educational programs.”  The order of reductions will start with teachers with a composite evaluation rating of “ineffective,” then proceed to teachers rated “developing,” followed by “proficient,” and finally those rated “accomplished.”  Within each evaluation category, teachers with limited contracts are reduced first, followed by teachers with continuing contracts.  After applying specialized training and experience and any other negotiated factors to the statutory framework, teachers within the same evaluation and contract category shall be given preference based on seniority (RC 3311.83).

Termination and suspension:  The board may place a teacher on disciplinary suspension for a definite period of time for good and just cause.  For purposes of contract terminations, good and just cause shall include receiving an evaluation rating of “ineffective” for two consecutive years.  A teacher may appeal pursuant to grievance procedures in any applicable collective bargaining agreement (RC 3311.82).

School calendar:  The board of education of a municipal school district has final authority to establish a school calendar, including year round instruction and length of the school day, for one or more of the district’s school buildings (consistent with state minimums).  The district board and teacher’s labor organization shall negotiate regarding any additional compensation for an extended school year/day consistent with the performance-based salary schedule (RC 3311.85).

Collective bargaining:  The requirements listed above for performance-based salary schedules, teacher assignment, evaluations, reductions in teachers, seniority and tenure, termination and suspension, and school calendar prevail over any conflicting provisions of a collective bargaining agreement entered into on or after the effective date of the bill.

Local school levies may include “qualifying” charter schools:  The board of education of a municipal school district may declare that it is necessary to levy a tax for the purpose of paying the current expenses of the district and of “qualifying” charter schools.  The board resolution and voter ballot shall state the purpose of the levy, the rate of the tax in mills per dollar of taxable value, the number of such mills to be levied for the current expenses of the qualifying charter schools and the number of such mills to be levied for the current expenses of the school district (RC 5705.21).

• “Qualifying” charter school:  A charter school established under state law located within the territory of the municipal school district that is either sponsored by the district or a party to an agreement with the district identifying goals and standards.

Transformation Alliance:  If one or more “partnering” charter schools (charters in district territory that are sponsored by the district, have an agreement with the district, receive services from the district or lease a building from the district) are located in a municipal school district, the mayor may establish a school district Transformation Alliance.  The mayor shall appoint the initial directors, which shall include representatives of all of the following: the school district; partnering community schools; the community at large, including parents and educators and; the business and foundation community.  The mayor shall be an ex officio director and the chairperson of the board of directors (RC 3311.86).

• Transformation alliance approval of charter school openings:  The Transformation Alliance is authorized to approve charter school openings in the school district, based on objective criteria, developed in consultation with Ohio Department of Education (ODE).  The decision by the Alliance may be appealed to ODE.

• Other responsibilities:  The Alliance shall do all of the following:  1) confirm and monitor implementation of the Transformation Alliance education plan (develop a system of district and partnering charter schools); 2) suggest national education models and collect input from the community in the development of new schools; 3) work with the school district and partnering charter schools to adopt a framework to annually assess district and charter schools; 4) communicate school choices within the school district and; 5) assess charter school growth and quality in the district by applying national quality standards.

Earlier this week, Ohio House Democrats announced a proposal to aid in offsetting the impact of the reduced funding for school districts and local governments passed in House Bill 153.  The Kids and Community First Fund uses surplus revenue (currently at $265 million),  a portion of the Budget Stabilization Fund ($120 million), and $15 million in Governor Kasich’s severance tax increase to restore up to $400 million to school districts and local governments in the first year. This fund will keep teachers in the classroom and safety forces on the streets in communities all across Ohio.  As early as July 2012, school districts and local governments could apply for an emergency relief grant.

After Fiscal Year 2013, the fund would be replenished and supported by the severance tax increase as proposed by Governor Kasich.  Additionally, a portion of the tax revenue collected by the state would also be available to protect local communities impacted by hydraulic fracking.

The proposal will be offered as an amendment next week to House Bill 487, Governor Kasich’s Mid-Biennium Review, currently pending in the House Finance and Appropriations Committee.  The amendment would reinstate the as introduced language on the Kasich Severance Tax, which was removed by House Republicans after the introduction of House Bill 487.

OEA is supportive of this initiative and applauds the Ohio House Democratic Caucus for their willingness and compassion to restore some funding to Ohio’s schools to ensure great public schools for every child.

Mayor Jackson’s Cleveland Plan: SB 325 and HB 506

After numerous negotiation meetings between Mayor Jackson and the Cleveland Teachers Union (CTU), an affiliate of the Ohio Federation of Teachers (OFT), an agreement has been reached on a broad range of issues initially proposed by the Mayor and corporate groups in Cleveland. 

A new draft of legislation that reflects the announced agreements is expected to be introduced as new, separate bills in the House and Senate.  The bills are expected to have the same primary sponsors of the current Cleveland Plan bills.  SB 325 is sponsored by Sen. Peggy Lehner (R-Kettering) and Sen. Nina Turner (D-Cleveland).  HB 506 is sponsored by Rep. Ron Amstutz (R-Wooster) and Rep. Sandra Williams (D-Cleveland).  There are no co-sponsors of SB 325 and HB 506.  The process of introducing the new bills will allow legislators another chance to sign on as co-sponsors. 

According to the parties, the proposal to require a one-time “fresh start” on the CTU collective bargaining agreement has been dropped.  OFT and CTU still oppose inclusion in the new bills of a provision that would allow local levy funding to be sent to charter schools.  CTU did not assent to this provision.  OEA also opposes the charter school levy provision and is assisting with efforts to remove it from the bills.  In addition, there are ongoing concerns about the transparency and authority of the Transformational Alliance, a new oversight body, relative to the existing Cleveland school board. 

According to Mayor Jackson, agreements have been reached in the following areas:

• Low performing schools:  Allows the district to more quickly intervene in low-performing schools in consultation and collaboration with employee unions and clarifies teachers and employees cannot and will not be fired just because they work in a low-performing school;

• Differentiated salary schedule:  Requires the development of a salary schedule that factors in performance, specialized training, and other relevant experience and ensures that teachers will not receive pay cuts simply because a new pay schedule is created;

• Teacher evaluations:  Maintains the work between the district and CTU on a modernized Teacher Development and Evaluation system while expanding timelines and focusing on quality;

• Teacher assignments:  Allows the district to fill teaching positions in all schools using hiring teams that include principals, teachers and parents, as opposed to assigning teachers based on seniority;

• Tenure and dismissal:  Provides the district wider discretion about granting tenure and streamlines the dismissal process for poor performing teachers by focusing on performance evaluations as the primary factor, while protecting the due process rights for district employees;

• Reduction in force or layoff:  Aligns layoff decisions to teacher evaluations and teacher quality and uses tenure and seniority as tiebreakers when needed;

• School year calendar:  Allows the school district to set the school year and school day calendar for all district schools;

• Transformation Alliance: Clarifies that the Transformational Alliance must conduct public meetings, provide access to public records and adopt appropriate conflict-of-interest policies. 

We acknowledge the importance of the negotiation process between CTU and Mayor Jackson on policies that only impact the Cleveland Municipal School District (CMSD).  However, we strongly oppose any attempts by the governor or legislature to spread these policies to any other school district in the state. 

In addition, OEA strongly opposes one provision of the current version of the bill—the dangerous precedent of sending local school levy money to charter schools.  Mayor Jackson’s Cleveland Plan legislation will allow local levy money to go to charter schools, most of which are fraught with dismal academic performance and lack accountability for how they spend money.  OEA is currently lobbying aggressively to remove this provision from the House and Senate versions of the bill.  OFT and CTU oppose this provision as well.

• 182 days to 455 hours for half-day Kindergarten
• 182 days to 910 hours for full-day Kindergarten and grades 1-6
• 182 days to 1,001 hours for grades 7-12
• Defines a school week generally as five days for school districts.

In order to satisfy the minimum hourly requirements:

• A school may count up to 10 hours per year for grades K through 6, and up to 11 hours per year for grades 7 through 12, when classes are dismissed for individualized parent-teacher conferences and reporting periods.
• A school may count up to 10 hours per year in grades K through 6, and 11 hours in grades 7 through 12, when the schools are closed for teacher professional meetings.
• For students in grades Kindergarten through 6, a school may count morning and afternoon recess periods of not more than 15 minutes each.

Calamity Days:

• Eliminates calamity days and allows school districts to use any time over the minimum hour
  requirements (above) to be used for time missed due to calamity. 
• Unlike current law, a school is not permitted to count any “calamity” days or hours (including two-hour delays or early dismissals) toward its minimum hourly requirement.  HB 191 allows for public schools to make up some calamity time (3-days, 24 hours) via online lessons or paper “blizzard bags.”  This concept was passed in House Bill 153, the most recent budget
  bill. 

Labor Day:

• The bill prohibits schools operated by school districts, charter schools and STEM schools from opening for instruction earlier than Labor Day.  
• Allows for a school district to opt-out of this mandate by having a local school board hold a public hearing, pass a resolution and submit a copy to the Ohio Department of Education to receive a waiver. 

Collective Bargaining:

• Provides that the changes within HB 191 to the required minimum school year do not apply
  to any collective bargaining agreement executed prior to the bill’s effective date of July 1, 2013.
• Stipulates that any collective bargaining agreement executed or renewed after the bill’s
  effective date must comply with the changes.

OEA is opposed to HB 191.  OEA’s primary concerns include the possibility of school district reductions to current levels of instructional time, post-Labor Day start time, different day to hour calculations for counting professional development and “blizzard bags” toward minimum hourly requirements, and transportation issues.  The bill is currently pending in the House Education Committee.