Gov. Scott, veto education bill

Gov. Rick Scott should veto the monstrosity of an education bill the Legislature passed on Monday.

We will get to what is — and isn’t — in the bill. First, consider how a few legislators produced a budget that actually cuts money for education, even though times are good. Worse, they further undercut traditional public schools, which the vast majority of Florida students attend.

Legislative leaders proudly proclaim the $82.4 billion budget passed Monday will increase funding for education. But given the growth headed our way, it’s misleading to call the money an increase.

Broward Schools, for example, is scheduled to receive an extra $26 million. However, $19 million would go to cover the new classrooms and teachers needed for the new students headed our way. Plus, lawmakers imposed a $5 million increase for the state retirement fund and changed the formula for utility rates. When all is said and done, the district is looking at a $7 million decrease from last year.

This, in a year when Florida’s economy booming.

Gov. Scott tried to do better by kids. He proposed a $216 increase in per-pupil spending, or 3 percent. But focused on other priorities, lawmakers undercut his per-pupil proposal to $25, or .34 percent. Florida spends an average $7,200 per-student every year, compared to an average $11,000 nationwide.

The real priority for legislative leaders was HB 7069, which began as a six-page bill focused on the teacher bonus program. By Monday, it had swelled to 278 pages and was stuffed with nearly 60 pieces of legislation.

All this happened in secret. House Speaker Richard Corcoran, R-Land O’Lakes, orchestrated the back-door dealmaking, despite his pre-session pledge of transparency. The goal was to force approval of controversial proposals that might have failed on their own.

HB 7069 spells out how another $419 million in education priorities will be spent. It includes some good things, like teacher bonuses, recess for elementary school students and allowing students to take assessment tests using pencil and paper. It also would let students bring sunscreen to school. Who knew we needed a law for that?

But HB 7069 also would create the bad precedent of letting forprofit charter schools get public money to construct privatelyowned buildings. Charter schools are public schools run by private operators who, when they first came to Florida, claimed they wouldn’t need such money. Now they want it.

Consider that for years, the Legislature has starved public schools of money for construction and maintenance. That’s why Broward voters approved an $800 million bond in November 2014 to fix aging schools. It’s also why Palm Beach County voters last November approved a one-cent sales increase, with half of the money going for school maintenance and construction the state used to finance.

HB 7069 wouldn’t let charters grab the referendum money. (Broward shares $12 million a year with them.) However, after factoring out public school debt, charters would get an even split of property tax dollars for capital projects. Broward figures it would have to give charters $13 million a year. Palm Beach is looking at paying millions, too.

Mike Burke, chief financial officer of Palm Beach County schools, predicts longterm problems if this monumental change goes through. Districts could see lower credit ratings as charters tap into money once reserved for public schools. And with the money fueling charter school growth, districts wouldn’t know from year to year how much they might lose. The bill also contains $140 million for what Corcoran calls “Schools of Hope.” The money would go to private charters that set up near low-performing schools, supposedly to offer a better alternative. In fact, charter schools could refuse to take certain students, such as those for whom English isn’t their first language. That’s the sort of “corporate welfare” Corcoran accused Scott of practicing with Enterprise Florida.

Plus, the criteria for “Schools of Hope” remain vague. As of Monday, Palm Beach County Superintendent Robert Avossa didn’t think any county schools met the criteria to attract a statefunded competitor. Broward couldn’t say for certain. As with so much about this bill, no one is sure.

Most legislators didn’t see HB 7069 until Friday afternoon. We know as much as we do only because of the required 72-hour “cooling-off period” between agreement on the budget and the vote.

The “Schools of Hope” proposal, however, would make it harder for districts to improve low-performing schools. It would change how districts can use federal Title I money that goes for extra programs. Avossa called it “micromanaging” by the Legislature. “Last year, we got 21 schools off the ‘D’ and ‘F’ list by using Title I money. That change will hurt.”

Meanwhile, the legislation fails to sufficiently address two concerns of parents: excessive testing and mandatory recess. Just one test would be eliminated: the end-of-course Algebra II exam. Public schools would have to give students a 20-minute recess period, but only through fifth grade. Charter schools would be exempt.

There’s more to dislike, such as the continuation of a teacher bonus program based on silly criteria, such as what teachers scored on the SAT years ago. Bonuses also don’t count toward teachers’ pensions.

Vetoing the bill would give Scott a chance to re-engage on an issue that matters more to everyday Floridians than Enterprise Florida. Scott staked everything on money for the business recruitment agency, and he lost. Given the importance of quality schools in recruiting companies to Florida, here’s his next best cause.

Corcoran appears to have the votes in the House to override a veto of the bill. But in the Senate, Democrats could join with Republicans to uphold a veto. It would be a good use of power they rarely have.

In an op-ed article for the Tampa Bay Times, two House Republicans referenced Frederick Douglass in touting HB 7069 as a way to help at-risk kids. Actually, the bill is a fraud upon the state. Scott should veto the bill and focus on getting education right.

Given the growth headed our way, it’s misleading to call the money an increase.