- On paper some of the big winners in the governor's budget
are public schools.
The governor wants to invest an additional $650 million over the
biennium.
But for some schools there's a catch.
Joining us now to talk about that is James Howard, President
of Madison Metropolitan School District.
Thanks for your time today.
- Thanks for having me.
- Governor Walker is calling for an increase in funding of
$200 per student in the first year and $204 in the second
year.
After six years of proposed cuts from the governor, that's got to
be good news, right?
- Well, it's good news, but you have to really think about the
fact that we have been working really with quite a bit of a
deficit.
I just want to make sure everyone understands that
although it's good news that it's really hard to make up for
the deficit we've been under the last six years.
- And of course there's a catch with that as we mentioned
because the governor's budget says school districts must be in
compliance with Act 10 before receiving that aid and Madison
School District is not.
- Well it depends on how you define it.
Under the original definition of compliance, we have been
compliant.
And under the new definition which we're just studying, seems
as though, yes, there is a little bit of a catch.
But we feel that we will be able to come into compliance with the
new definition.
It's something we have not studied and talked about yet
with administration and board.
This is all new.
But we feel that, yes, we should be able to come in compliance
with the new definition.
But we need to study it a little more.
- And that word "compliance" is interesting because ever since
Act 10 came onboard the governor and his allies have talked about
it as the "tools" of Act 10, to allow school districts to handle
the cuts in state funding that were coming their way and
allowing each district to make their own choices in how they
use that.
You felt you've been in compliance with what the law
required.
- We've been in compliance.
What we really want to acknowledge and really make a
point of is that we have over the last six years worked with
our staff and we've had this collaborative process in place
and we feel that through that process that we've really come
into agreement and come to a point where we're getting the
best agreement between staff, administration that's possible.
And we have to understand that if you were to place an entire
say 12%, which is called upon in the request in terms of Act 10
compliance, that's a big hit for our staff.
And we have worked hard to work with our carriers, our insurance
carriers, keep costs down and we think that we're in a good
place.
The only thing we're asking is allow us to continue to be able
to manage it on the local level and not really mandate how we
should take care of our staff.
- And just to clarify for our audience that may not be
familiar with the deal, the area that's in concern here with
Madison is the amount that teachers and staff pay towards
their health insurance premiums.
Act 10 required it to be around 88% and Madison staff does not
pay that much.
The school district pays more, but obviously making them pay
more would mean a pay cut for them.
- Well, let's understand that the requirement was really on
municipalities, on city government.
It really was not on school districts from the beginning.
And so this is what's new.
That he's now--the governor is now placing the requirement on
school districts.
Six years ago when Act 10 came into existence,
it was for city government.
It was not for schools.
We had the option of requiring up to 12%.
For a few years we didn't require anything.
But as of today we do require between 1.5 and 10% from our
staff.
- It seems like Act 10 had been in the past.
Most municipalities and school districts had moved on with
whatever agreement they had.
Does it feel like the governor is ripping open old wounds here?
- We like to refer to it as the re-election budget.
And we think that some of this is political.
Let's face it.
School districts, if you look at, for example, referendum as
an indicator, many districts across the state
have been going to referendums.
And the reason that is is that districts, especially rural
districts, have not had the funding that's needed to provide
for programming.
We're wondering if this is not a little bit of politics and this
is a pretty much a re-election budget.
Yes, we're more than happy to receive funding, but we've been
really on a tight purse over the last six years.
- And obviously there's a long way to go in this budget before
it becomes law, but if it does as written, if the Madison
School District didn't come into this new definition of
compliance, they wouldn't receive some of this per pupil
increase which affects students and local taxpayers.
That would be pitting a lot of groups against each other at the
local level if you didn't ask teachers to pay up to the full
12%.
- I think the way we're going to proceed is to come to the
table with staff, come to the table with our teachers and
really talk about -- and this is the process we've had in place,
really talk about -- use a collaborative process and say
how do we move forward.
How do we move forward with the requirement now that we require
you all to pay up to 12%?
How do we really do that?
We do know there are also some legislators that are saying that
they're not really pleased with these numbers.
And so it may not really come to pass.
So we'll sit down with staff, and we'll talk about this and
see through our collaborative process where is the best --
where should we end up?
What's the best path forward?
- And less than a minute left, but is it a possibility that you
ask the staff and teachers to take the cut and pay more for
their insurance but then make it up in a pay raise somewhere else
so they are made whole in the end of the process?
- Well, we do believe in making the entire situation, making our
staff whole.
That's a possibility.
Again, it's something we'll have to talk about.
This has only been on the table for a day or two and we haven't
had a chance to vet it properly.
Again though, you're right.
It could come to that.
We could figure out a way to make it up
in some kind of a pay increase. That's correct.
- Have you heard a lot from your staff?
- Not as of yet.
We haven't gotten any feedback from staff at this point.
Maybe a few emails.
But we know from the past that we already have staff
that's hurting.
Our lower-paid staff are only making the 20s, 20 some thousand
a year.
As you know, that's barely subsistence.
When you talk about increasing the amount they pay in to any
fund, that's going to be a big hit for them.
- James Howard, thanks for your time today.
- Thanks for having me.