Leadership Matters - June 2013

Message from the Executive Director: By Dr. Brent Clark

Public education holds line for FY 14

Most importantly, restoring local control over whether to implement certain unfunded mandates. The pension reform maneuvering was perhaps the most intriguing political chess match in some time at the Statehouse. While some described it as a showdown between the state’s two most powerful Democrats – House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton – I saw it a little differently. I saw it first and foremost as a philosophical difference of opinion. I think Cullerton truly believes that Senate Bill 1 was unconstitutional because it unilaterally would have imposed cuts to the pension benefits of employees and retirees. Madigan, on the other hand, wanted the largest savings possible and was willing to gamble on the fact that the Illinois Supreme Court would factor the state’s financial situation into its final decision and ultimately would have granted “police powers” to the state to circumvent the constitution. The fact that Madigan refused to call Cullerton’s Senate Bill 2404 for a vote in the House meant that no pension reform measure would pass. How that situation will play out over the course of the next few months is anybody’s guess. While Cullerton and the vast majority of Senators held to their belief that SB 1 was unfair and unconstitutional, the pressure from Madigan, the governor and many editorial boards will continue to be intense. I would analyze this session as one in which public education held its own and survived. Some would say that compared to the overall financial situation in our state, maybe that’s not so bad. My response is that especially in the worst of times, public education is the best investment that can be made in the future of our state. So we will continue our efforts, including the Vision 20/20 project that kicks off this month for IASA to develop a roadmap for the future of public education in Illinois. I want to thank you for your help and support during these most challenging times, especially to those of you who took the time and made the effort to talk with your local legislators. Those personal connections really do make a difference. When we work together, IASA is a powerful voice for public education.

As the most challenging legislative session in memory for public education drew to a close, it reminded me of a game of tic-tac-toe that once again ends in a draw. You don’t really win, but you don’t lose. One adage of longtime Statehouse observers is that if you bet on the “Nothing” horse, you’ll win 90 percent of the time – and the “Nothing” horse raced home a winner on the pension reform issue. The governor said he will call the four legislative leaders back to Springfield soon to “forge a comprehensive pension reform agreement.” Probably the biggest “win” for education was the General Assembly restoring General State Aid and Transportation for FY14 to this year’s level. Of course, that still funds GSA at only 89 percent and Transportation at 64 percent. But the governor’s proposal was to lower the funding for GSA to as little as 82 percent and to virtually wipe out the Transportation budget by prorating it as low as 19 percent. So it not only could have been worse, it could have been catastrophic for many school districts. Avoiding a cost shift for local school districts was another good thing, but that is a subject that is certain to resurface in the future according to Rep. Elaine Nekritz, who served as Speaker Michael Madigan’s point person on the issues of the cost shift and pension reform. A cost shift for universities and community colleges did pass the House with a bare minimum of 60 votes, but got shot down in the Senate, where it fell seven votes short of the 30 necessary. The Illinois School Management Alliance was opposed to a cost shift, but we did negotiate with House leadership and demanded that certain items be a part of any cost shift legislation for public school districts, including: A slow, predictable implementation schedule of ½ of 1 percent per year; The ability to use the IMRF/Social Security levy for pension cost of reciprocal systems outside of the tax caps; A much stronger voice on the TRS Board as well as the ability for that board to approve or disapprove any changes the General Assembly might make to the benefits package; and

3