TCCTA Blog

Special Session Ends

Lawmakers approved and sent to Gov. Perry bills that will keep five state agencies operating for the next two years and that authorize the expenditure of $2 billion in voter-approved road bonds.

The Session failed to address the the issue of private toll roads.

These were the only items allowed under the governor's agenda.

TCCTA will follow interim activities leading up to the 2011 Regular Session and post any news on the Web site.

Sen. Zaffirini Wants Proportionality on Agenda

Gov. Perry has kept the agenda for the Special Session extremely limited, with plans for a fix of some unresolved issues regarding agency authorization, toll roads, and highway bonds. But that hasn't stopped Sen. Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo) from trying again to abolish proportionality. On the last evening of the Regular Session, on June 1, she had a measure prepared for a vote that had already passed the House, but failed to get recognized before adjournment. She certainly made a valiant effort to help all community college educators, along with Rep. Burt Solomons (R-Carrollton), who sponsored the House version.

For background, see this previous post.  

Since the concept of proportionality originated with the governor's office (and the Legislative Budget Board), it seems unlikely that Gov. Perry will extend the "call" to include a bill to eliminate it. Under the Texas Constitution, the governor decides the subject matter of Special Sessions. 

Thankfully, proportionality was not included in the budget for the next biennium, but community college personnel would still like to see it excluded by law from consideration.

Below is the text of a press release from Sen. Zaffirini:

(AUSTIN) – Senator Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, Friday (June 26) pre-filed Senate Bills (SB) 7, 8 and 9, which would provide health benefits for graduate students who receive prestigious fellowships and resolve the issue of “proportionality” for community colleges by defining the eligibility of personnel for state-funded health benefits.

On June 19 the Senator wrote to Gov. Rick Perry, asking him to include or to add the issue of proportionality to the call for the special session that begins Wednesday (June 30). Her three bills are identical to SB 41, SB 42 and House Bill (HB) 2083, which she authored with Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, during the regular legislative session.

SB 41 died in the Senate Finance Committee without a hearing, and HB 2083 died there without a vote. SB 42, however, was passed by the Senate and amended in the House to include proportionality. In spite of overwhelming support, it died when the legislature adjourned without concluding its business.

“These three bills focus on the needs of higher education faculty, administrators, and graduate students,” Senator Zaffirini said. “They would not only allow universities to recruit the most able graduate students, but also resolve the issue about which community college employees are eligible for state health benefits."

"Proportionality," or the practice of paying health benefits only for employees whose salaries are funded by the state, became a major issue in 2007 after the governor vetoed $154 million in group health insurance benefits for community colleges.

Differences were resolved in May by the governor, community college personnel, and legislators. Their compromise was reflected in HB 2083 and in the amended SB 42, but senators never had the opportunity to concur with amendments.

Senate Bill 7 would define any instructional and administrative employee as eligible for state-funded health benefits and would allow universities to pay the health benefits of graduate students who receive a fellowship of at least $10,000. It is identical to Senator Zaffirini’s SB 42, after it was amended during the regular session.

Senator Zaffirini also filed SB 8, which addresses only the issue of proportionality and is identical to House Bill 2083 (Solomons/Zaffirini) from the regular session. Her SB 9 addresses only the issue of graduate student health insurance and is identical to her SB 42 before it was amended.

"During the 2009 regular legislative session, Rep. Solomons and I worked tirelessly with community college representatives and the governor's staff to forge a compromise to resolve proportionality," Senator Zaffirini said. “Although we prevailed in removing the negative impact of proportionality from the appropriations bill, we failed to secure a permanent solution by not passing the bill. Unless we do so during the special session, the controversy undoubtedly will be visited anew in 2011.”

Special Session Called for July 1

Gov. Perry has called a Special Session of the Legislature for July 1, in order to complete some unfinished business from the Regular Session. Under the Texas Constitution, the governor sets the agenda for Special Sessions, which last a maximum of 30 days. 

So far the governor has not included any matters related directly to higher education in the agenda. If this situation changes, an update will be posted. 

Here's an article from today's Austin American-Statesman (registration).

HB 3 Targets College Readiness

A new law governing public education for Texas contains a number of provisions that may be of interest to community college educators. HB 3, a massive bill recently passed by 2009 Regular Session of the Legislature, contains 180 pages of stipulations, mostly directed at public school "accountability." Here's the text of the bill.

Of particular note are provisions related to "college readiness." For instance, the bill makes readiness part of the accountability system by requiring schools to increase the number of students who are prepared—as defined by various assessments. There is also a new standard for end-of-course exams regarding English III and Algebra II, two key disciplines of concern for many community college faculty. The intent of the legislation is to insure that students who enroll in freshman English and mathematics for college credit have been adequately prepared and evaluated. Many observers have complained in the past that the TAKS and TEKS regimen was geared toward high school graduation, but did not contain enough rigor for college-level work.

As usual, details will be worked out over the next two years as the statute is implemented by the Texas Education Agency and the Coordinating Board. These details will be crucial in determining whether the new law is effective. 

A nice summary of the bill's provisions can be found in the Conference Committee report, available here, courtesy of the Texas Classroom Teachers Association, a professional association of K-12 educators in the public schools. 

Final Bill Tracking Report Available

Several recent posts have attempted to explain the impact of the 2009 Regular Session upon Texas community and technical colleges, with special emphasis upon bills that relate to educators. This is only part of the story, of course. For the full list of legislative posts, visit this link.

TCCTA tracked scores of bills this Session, with daily updates allowing members the opportunity to find out the latest information on measures of their choice. By far, most of these bills did not pass. It is an interesting exercise to scroll down the list, to see if any patterns emerge. Here's the tracking list.

Undoubtedly, many "dead" bills relate to tuition exemptions for various categories of Texans: veterans, firefighters, individuals with disabilities, public employees, etc. It is easy to suspect that most of these were doomed from the start, since bills that require expenditures (and exempting students from paying tuition does) necessitate what is known as a Fiscal Note." A Fiscal Note describes the financial cost to the state and, in times of tight budgets, often casts a dark shadow over a bill's prospects. Bills that have a zero fiscal note are highly prized by committees during hearings. 

There don't appear to be any other substantive similarities in terms of which bills pass and which ones don't. Not surprisingly, committee chairs tend to have a better record, or if the member is on the Senate Finance or House Appropriations Committees. This Session, however, as reported earlier, found that many highly influential members failed to get their bills through. 

Developmental Education and Performance Funding Language Added

As noted in previous posts, bills designed to overhaul the system of developmental education and to enact a new formula for "incentive" funding failed during the 2009 Regular Session.

However, language added to the appropriations bill virtually insures that these two issues will be around during the interim, and that we can expect more legislative activity in 2011. Such "instructions" added to funding bills are common.

First, let's examine the stipulation regarding developmental education. Commissioner of Higher Education Raymund Paredes has called for a complete overhaul of courses in this field, including a thorough examination of "best practices" and experimentation with non-course based instruction. Here's what the language in the appropriations bill says:

Funding for Non-Semester-Length Developmental Education. Out of funds appropriated above, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board shall approve non-semester-length developmental education interventions (including course-based, non-course-based, alternative-entry/exit, and other intensive developmental education activities) in the Lower Division Academic Course Guide Manual before August 31, 2009. Approved non-semester-length developmental education interventions shall be eligible for formula funding beginning in fall 2010 and subject to limitations prescribed by law.

Institutions shall analyze the fiscal and instructional impacts on student outcomes for both semester-length and non-semester-length developmental education interventions. The institutions shall prepare a report to the Board no later than June 1, 2010. The Board, in conjunction with the Legislative Budget Board and institutions of higher education, shall use existing performance measures and data to assist in the evaluation of student outcomes for these interventions, including but not limited to, student success in first-college-level-course by subject, persistence, transfer, and degree or certificate completion.

The Board shall analyze and compare all institution reports to determine the most effective and efficient combination of developmental education interventions and make recommendations to the Legislative Budget Board and the Governor before January 1, 2011.

Now let's have a look at a brief statement on "performance funding," another subject which failed to materialize in the form of passed legislation in 2009:

Performance Reporting of Retention, Completion and Transferability. In collaboration with the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, the Legislative Budget Board shall use the funds appropriated in this Act to be in a position to recommend to the 82nd Legislature a comprehensive performance reporting methodology that measures each community college district's progress in achieving state goals on retention, completion and transferability.

Members are urged to visit the Blog frequently for updates on activity from the Coordinating Board on these two very important subjects.

Appropriation for Each School Available for Viewing

Formula funding for community and technical colleges for the next biennium rose significantly. The appropriations bill passed by the recent Regular Session is now available for viewing online, in pdf format. Importantly, you can see how much "general revenue" your school will get in each year, starting in 2010. Here's the link, courtesy of the Texas Association of Community Colleges. The grand total for all schools is $929,621,578 for each of the two years. This amount does not include revenue for retirement and health benefits, or other special programs.

The bill also provides funding for the Virtual College of Texas and STARLINK.

Comparative data regarding previous years and, most significantly, the percentage of the instructional formula that is funded  by the Legislature (reflecting enrollment and associated costs in the previous "base year") will be posted here when the information becomes available.

The state budget was helped considerably this year by the infusion of federal stimulus funds to all states. Although there were restrictions on how the money could be used, it still relieved financial stress in all areas of the budget. Presumably this "cushion" will not be available in future Sessions, causing concern among Capitol observers about the outlook for 2011.

A subsequent post will discuss some interesting instructional notes on developmental education and performance funding that were included in the appropriations bill.

Dead Bills: R.I.P.

Posts in this space will continue to analyze the results of the 2009 Regular Session. 

Obviously there is a great deal of significance to community and technical colleges in various bills that passed and were sent to the governor. But it is noteworthy that a number of highly portentous measures didn't make it. Interestingly, some were sponsored by influential senators and representatives, and supported by powerful forces in the state such as the Governor's Business Council. One explanation for these casualties might be that this particular Session was…well, different. The word "chaotic" kept creeping into media reports and blogs covering the events of 2009, especially in the House.

Following are several "dead" bills of particular interest to two-year colleges. Most deal with subjects that will likely return in 2011— "zombies" that could rise again. 

Incentive Funding

This issue is highly fashionable nationwide, but there is considerable controversy over whether such efforts toward enhanced efficiency in higher education have made any difference in other states. The most significant effort here in Texas was sponsored by Rep. Geanie Morrison (R-Victoria), and Sen. Florence Shaprio (R-Plano). You may want to have a look at the version that died in committee on the Senate side, after passing the House. Here's the text. Scroll down to the part about "community junior colleges." The measure uses a complex matrix for rewarding student "success" in a variety of forms: transfers, "at risk" student completion, degrees and certificates awarded, and enrollment in high priority fields such as the sciences and nursing.

Developmental Education "Overhaul"

Commissioner of Higher Education Raymund Paredes has argued repeatedly that developmental eduction needs a complete do-over. Changes are still likely via the Coordinating Board, but a bill to formulate a plan died in committee. The companion bills were sponsored by Rep. Morrison and Sen. Shapiro, as with the bill discussed above. The commissioner and Coordinating Board believe that developmental education should experiment with "best practices" that include funding for non-course based classes. Undoubtedly the issue will be with us for a long time.

Guns on Campus

There was plenty of national media coverage, student protests, and emotional testimony on a bill to allow licensed owners of concealed handguns to bring their weapons on campus. The idea being that a Virginia Tech-style shooting could be stopped if someone nearby was equipped to do something about it on the spot—and that this is a more likely scenario than added violence due to more guns on campus. A bill sponsored by Sen. Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio) passed the Senate, but died in Calendars in the House. There is no reason to presume the issue will go away any time soon.

The Health Insurance "Guinea Pig" Bill

Sen. Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock), late in the session, brought up a bill that would have created a pilot program within the Employees Retirement System (which governs health benefits for higher education employees and retirees) "to pay for services on a per-person basis, on a per-disease or health care need basis, on a performance basis, or on any combination thereof, in order to align payments with quality of care rather than quantity of care." Sen. Duncan wanted to experiment with a new way to reimburse providers, in an effort to save revenue. The bill passed the Senate and died in the House. It would be foolish to predict anything in the area of health insurance these days.

Criminal Background Checks

The official analysis for this bill cites statistics on violence at general academic institutions (which does not technically apply to community colleges) to justify an elaborate system of criminal background checks on anyone who applies for a job or promotion at institutions of higher education. The analysis doesn't say how many of these criminal acts were actually perpetrated by employees. Notwithstanding any concerns about civil liberties and whether or not two-year schools are included (the actual bill text seems to do so), the measure likely would have proved cumbersome and perhaps subject to charges of an "unfunded mandate" on schools. The measure was sponsored by Sen. Tommy Williams (R-The Woodlands). It passed the Senate and died in the House. 

TRS and ORP: It's Complicated

The 2009 Regular Session enacted changes in the rates paid by the state for the two retirement programs serving higher education employees, reflecting a tight budget driven by the recent financial crisis. 

The Texas Teacher Retirement System, a "defined benefits" plan, and the Optional Retirement Program, a "defined contribution" plan, are very different conceptually. Newly hired faculty members and administrators must choose one or the other, and the decision is permanent under the law. Neither plan is immune from a declining portfolio of investments, but ORP participants have much more immediate personal exposure to market fluctuations. 

Let's take them up separately, in terms of what the 2009 Regular Session passed into law.

TRS

The state's contribution is set to decrease from 6.58 percent to 6.4 percent for active employees in TRS. However, it's possible the System board will adjust it upward, based on an expected ruling by the Attorney General regarding a "13th check" of $500 for retirees. In the 2007 Session the Legislature had raised the rate from the constitutional minimum of six percent to 6.58 percent. TRS members are urged to pay attention to official communications from the System in the weeks ahead. A forthcoming newsletter should explain the results of the Regular Session in updated terms, since much depends upon actions still to come.

Any downward movement of the rate is troublesome since the TRS fund, as reported here earlier, suffered historic losses of almost a third during the recent financial downturn. The goal of the TRS fund is to consistently achieve the statistical objective of "actuarial soundness," a calculation extrapolating forward for decades on the long term health of the fund. Some authorities have testified that, in order to reach such a goal right now, the Legislature would have to raise the state contribution to over 11 percent. The fund is so massive that, if the market returns to "normal" behavior over the next several years, the health of the fund should be restored, according to TRS witnesses this Session. However, it will be a while before benefits enhancements (such as increasing the multiplier or lowering the early retirement age) can be discussed seriously.

ORP

The Optional Retirement Program has always resisted generalization because state and local supplements affect the actual rate of contribution. Depending upon decisions made at the local institutional level, the rate of employer contribution will remain at the current maximum of 8.5 percent, even though the state minimum will be reduced to 6.4 percent.

To illustrate the complexity, please examine the following statement from a Coordinating Board official, sent to TCCTA on June 3, two days after the Legislature adjourned. (The Coordinating Board has legal jurisdiction over ORP.)

The state base rate for ORP is changing from 6.58% to 6.4% (same as TRS). The colleges are still authorized to supplement that up to 8.5%, so the maximum supplemental rate will be 2.1% rather than the current 1.92%.

ORP participants who do not receive a supplement will see their match go down by 0.18% (e.g., $90 less annually for a $50,000 salary). Colleges that have been providing a full supplement during the current biennium may continue to do so in the new biennium by bumping their local amount from 1.92% to 2.1%. However, the ORP statute and the GAA allow colleges to provide any supplemental rate up to a total employer rate of 8.5% (i.e., any supplemental rate from 0% to 2.1%), so it's possible that some colleges will choose to continue to provide a 1.92% supplement, which would also be a reduction of 0.18% for those participants.

The Coordinating Board's Ch. 25 rules provide that institutions can change their supplemental rate once per year.

Each September, TCCTA publishes an extensive analysis of TRS and ORP, with useful resources online for new hires and experienced educators alike. 

Good News (Mostly) on Proportionality

This is one of a series of posts examining the results of the recent Regular Session, in terms of the major effects upon two-year colleges. Members are urged to consult the Blog frequently for updates.

First, the Good News

The 2009 appropriations bill, which covers state spending for the 2010-11 biennium, provides for unreduced coverage of health benefits for community college educators, with no provision for proportionality.

By way of background, the concept of proportionality rests upon an assumption that the state is obligated to fund benefits based only on its relative "share" in funding community colleges generally. If the concept were implemented, the result would cost these schools millions of dollars, since local funds would be needed to replace the lost revenue. It would inevitably damage the instructional mission of these institutions. TCCTA has consistently opposed proportionality.

Fortunately, as the appropriations bill worked its way though the House and Senate, community college leaders reached a novel understanding with the governor's office. This is a remarkable milestone, since Gov. Perry, in 2007, vetoed funds for such benefits (money that was restored subsequently by legislative leadership). Furthermore, the driving force for proportionality came originally from the governor's office, along with the Legislative Budget Board staff.

In basic terms, the governor has agreed in principle to accept full budgetary inclusion in the state benefits system for community college educators, provided that any growth in dedicated appropriations for these benefits (due to new hiring) is linked to equivalent enrollment growth. In other words, colleges must grow in enrollment to qualify for added state support for new hires. 

Community college officials viewed this approach as a reasonable solution and are relieved that the issue can be put aside, at least for the next two years.

TCCTA Lobbyist Beaman Floyd urges members to keep in mind that such delicate understandings can sometimes deteriorate, and to take extra care in any public comments or communications.

Now, the Not-So-Great News 

As members are aware from numerous posts on this subject, key bills were introduced this Session that would have precluded the use of proportionality by law. In principle the passage of such a statute would have eliminated the entire concept as a matter of policy (with the understanding that no current Session of the Legislature can obligate a future Session under the Texas Constitution). TCCTA and the Texas Association of Community Colleges urged passage of HB 2083, by Rep. Burt Solomons (R-Carrollton), which passed the House with no opposition.

The Senate, however, proved more problematic, as HB 2083 was held pending in the Finance Committee. This is where the issue stood (a frequent graveyard for bills) until the final evening of the Session, when Sen. Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo), the author of a companion measure, attempted to resurrect HB 2083 within the framework of a different bill. Unfortunately, the Senate adjourned sine die without taking up the matter.

TCCTA members are grateful to Rep. Solomons and Sen. Zaffirini for their efforts to end proportionality as a matter of state policy, and for their untiring support for the community colleges of Texas.

Unfortunately, some senators remain convinced that proportionality should prevail. Therefore, the issue could surface again. Absent unforeseen developments, the concept will not come up until preparations are underway for the 2011 Regular Session.