Rep Council Minutes January 12, 2012

Rep Council Minutes January 12, 2012 Page 1 of 6 Officers present: President Candy Smiley, High School Vice President Peter Califano, Elementary Vice President Stephanie Martin, SPED Vice President Jan Van Horne, Secretary Naomi Lukaszewski, Treasurer Patrick Keough, Director Kelly Logan, Director Joe McEacheron Middle School Vice President Greg Strachan was absent due to personal reasons. School & Members Represented: High Schools New Direction Middle Schools Elementary Schools New Directions, Nurses, Pre-School DNHS BHMS AB HR POM TBCK MCHS BMMS CHAP LP RH VAL PHS MBMS CRKS MID SCRK WG RBHS MVMS DC MCRK SD WW WVHS OVMS DS MR SH NURSES TPMS GR PR SR PV TB Handouts: Agenda with attachments CFT Convention Pamphlet CFT Convention Delegate Info PFT Teacher Values Survey results Millionaires Tax : Fact Sheet History of Federal Individual Income Tax Bottom and Top Bracket Rates Capitol Alert: Rise in Number of California reporting incomes of more than $1 million Comparison of proposed initiatives for November 2012 Talking Taxes : Background paper on progressive tax policy Flyer: Fair and Progressive Tax Policy Call to order: 4:00 p.m. I. PFT Political Action Timeline A. End Goal: November 2012 1. Establish position and action around: a. Ballot initiatives b. School Funding c. Pension reform B. December 2011 1. History of School Funding presentation by Kimberly Beatty, Palomar Council Legislative Chair C. January 2012 1. Teacher Survey 2. Talking Taxes presentation by Fred Glass, CFT Representative. 3. Governor s initial Budget Proposal D. February 2012 1. Training in Message Framing with Bruce Dickinson, SW TURN E. February-May 2012 1. Develop action plan 2. May Revise of State Budget F. June-August 2012 1. Waiting period G. September-November 2012 1. Action

Page 2 of 6 II. Open Agenda A. Tentative Agreement: Salary rollback 1. Expires June 2012 a. Agreement was for 2 years: 2010-2011; 2011-2012 b. Teachers paid for 180 days; 8 day furlough 2. Salaries are restored to 2008-2009 levels a. 2009-2010 was first year of rollback: 2.7% b. Teachers will be paid for 188 days but work year will be 186 days. When does our contract end? Our contract is a living document. It is always open to negotiation. Some other districts have Closed contracts where once the contract has been negotiated, items cannot be revisited for the term of the contract. By law we must have a documented end date on our contract but we are always in negotiations. That is why we have MOU s (Memorandum Of Understanding). Our last printed contract has an end date of June 2009 but that does not mean it is not in effect. When we revisit our contract, it is to roll identified MOUs (some MOUs have end dates) into the contract language and/or make changes based on changes in the law. We are about to begin the process of revisiting the contract and rolling some of the MOUs into the contract. Are the students going back to 180 days? I don t know. --Is the district going to make that decision? Reducing the student year was an option given to districts by the State Legislature as a budget measure. Some districts that could afford to stay at 180 days did so and others did not. Secretary s note: Some districts who continue to have 180 days are Basic Aid districts. Basic Aid districts are able to keep the local property taxes to fund education. When you rewrite the contract are you going to present the MOUs rolling into the contract to the Rep Council or will you just decide what s going in? Which MOUs? --The MOUs on [Non Student Contact Time] All the MOUs connected to the Tentative Agreement: Non-Student Contact Time, Kindergarten Transition Days and others, expire with the Tentative Agreement and will need to be re-examined. Most of them were written with the idea of reducing the teacher workload due to the reduction in days and increased class sizes. We need to establish whether or not the need for those MOUs still exists. Will [the Rep Council] be presented with those MOUs before the next negotiations? The next IBPS is in February and we are not at the point of negotiating those MOUs yet. Are we going to have any say in the start date of the [2012-2013] school year? Currently we are starting on a Monday and starting on a Wednesday would be much better for students. The Calendar Committee includes parents, representative from the community and other employee unions, as well as the district and PFT. We can offer our input but the Calendar Committee makes the final decision. We do not have the final say. There are also other factors that impact scheduling the start date: the end date, holidays, religious observances, school events. We do give our input and that input is given consideration but we don t have the final say. We fought it and we lost. --But there was a time when we voted on different calendars Yes, there was. About 15 years ago, there was a vote. Don Raczka sent out VHS tapes detailing the choices, teachers voted and the Rep Council was preparing to put forth the teacher recommendation for the school year calendar. However, one site was not happy with the results and on behalf of the teachers at that site, their rep demanded at the Rep Meeting that PFT revisit the issue and present the choices to the teachers again. A vote was taken among the reps. The vote was split 50-50 with one vote the

Page 3 of 6 deciding factor in going back and revisiting the issue. The District refused to revisit the calendar and instead presented a Student calendar. PFT filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charging the district did not have the right to essentially impose a schedule on the teachers. The ULP went to an Administrative Law Judge who ruled in favor of the district, saying that determining the Student Schedule was outside the scope of negotiations and therefore the district had the legal right to determine the student calendar without the input or approval of the teachers. --We do put forward the teachers concerns around start date and end dates but there are a lot of moving parts and they do listen but again there are a lot of moving parts to determining the calendar. II. PFT/Principals meeting see Agenda Attachment 2 A. Scheduled for February 29 1. Due to space restrictions, attendance is limited. a. Elementary: 1 rep per site b. Middle School: 2 reps per site c. High School: 2-4 reps per site 2. Co-reps @ K-5 will need to decide which rep will attend B. Reps attending will need to request Administrative Release 1. Sub code will be sent to site secretaries. III. CFT Convention See CFT Convention Pamphlet A. Annual CFT Convention April 13-15, 2012 in San Jose. B. PFT proposes a maximum of 3 delegates. 1. Estimated cost is $1000/delegate C. Email will go out to all teachers. 1. If more than 3 indicate interest, Rep Council will vote and 3 with most number of votes will attend. 2. If less than 3 indicate interest, PFT will send present those names to the Rep Council and send those persons to the Convention. IV. PFT Elections See Agenda Attachment 1 A. All Executive Council, PFT Presidency, and Site Representative positions are open for election. 1. Officers: Secretary, Treasurer and Vice Presidents are elected yearly. 2. President is elected every 2 years. B. Candidates must declare candidacy and turn in signed petitions to PFT Offices by March 2, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. C. If incumbent officers and site reps are choosing to not continue and run for re-election, please notify PFT as soon as possible. 1. This will allow PFT to assist with finding a replacement if no one declares candidacy. V. PFT Teacher Value survey A. Participation rate: about 50% B. Reps are receiving results with unedited comments. 1. Reps should review for February Rep meeting C. Superintendent John Collins has requested to attend the February Rep Meeting around Framing as an observer. 1. Employed similar strategy during bond elections VI. Talking Taxes : Fred Glass, CFT Communications Director see handouts Secretary s note: If you would like a copy of the Power Point that accompanied this presentation, please contact me and I will send it to you. A. California 1. State is 8 th largest economy in the world. a. CA has larger economy than some countries 2. Has 3 rd -4 th highest unemployment rate in the country

Page 4 of 6 3. Has highest cost of living and 2 nd highest foreclosure rate in USA. a. Nevada is highest 4. Only oil producing state with no oil severance tax a. Oil Severance is a tax paid to the state by the oil company for extracting the oil from the ground. 5. Legislature in Sacramento is hampered by super majority requirements. a. Two-thirds majority vote required for passage of changes to taxes: increases, loophole closures. b. One-third of Legislature can impede legislation c. Until 2010, two-thirds majority was required for passage of budget. d. Two-thirds majority was established by Proposition 13 i) Corporate property is classified with home ownership. ii) With no change of ownership, corporate property is still being assessed at 1978 tax rates. 6. Possible solutions to overcome super majority issues a. Elect politicians who will vote for desired outcomes b. Pass ballot measure B. CFT s Fight For California s Future campaign 1. 3 Areas of focus a. Simple majority for budget approval b. Simple majority for passage of changes to taxes c. Focus on education 2. Successfully campaigned for change to budget approval process a. Proposition 25 i) Requires simple majority for budget approval ii) Imposes consequences for failure to approve budget on time 3. CA has ongoing budget crisis a. Inadequate budget revenues b. Proposition 13 super majority makes changes to taxes difficult c. Great Recession increased problems 4. Results over time: a. CA is 46 th in nation in educational spending b. Social services slashed c. State General Fund spending reduced by 15% over 3 years d. State Budget reduced from $102 to $82 billion What will happen to the Legislators who sign the No New Taxes Pledge and decide that circumstances warrant voting for a new tax? There is no legal punishment but the Republican party has been known to bring in candidates to oppose members of their own party who do not follow the party line and actively campaign against them. C. CA Budget Project Report 1. From 1995-2006: Gaines of Highest Bracket of Income Tax Payers increased by 106.4% 2. Top 1% of the population s share of state income doubled while their tax rates were lowered. 3. Over 30 years economic inequality has increased a. 1% share of state income has quadrupled over 30 years. b. Own one-third of country s wealth c. Average yearly income of 1% : $1.8 million/year d. Extension of 2010 Federal Tax cuts increased the 1% income by $9-$14 billion a year.

Exactly how many people are the 1% in California? CA has a population of about 37 million. 1% of that is about 300,000. Page 5 of 6 V. CFT Initiative: The Millionaires Tax A. Goal: To have people who earn in excess of $1 million/year to pay their fair share of taxes. B. Proposal 1. Additional 3% after 1 st million a. 3 cents on the dollar=$30,000 2. Additional 5% after 2 nd million b. 5 cents on the dollar=$50,000 (30K from first million and additional $20,000 after 2 nd million) 3. Not highest tax rate in US history. a. 1930 s: tax rate for top income earners was 15% b. Enabled US to get out of Great Depression 4. No expiration date C. Tax would raise $6.1 billion 1. Funds would be designated for specific programs a. 60% to education b. 25% to social services c. 10% to public safety d. 5% to roads and bridges D. Cost to average tax payer: $0.00 1. Provides stable funding for education, social services and maintenance of infrastructure. E. Research done by Tulchin Reasearch 1. Extensive amount of public opinion research including 16 focus groups of swing voters and numerous telephone surveys of likely voters 2. Voters believe rich have become richer and do not pay fair share of taxes F. Opposition 1. Businesses will leave CA if we raise their taxes a. Most millionaires are not businessmen b. Most millionaires make their money through capital gains 2. Businesses will pass on their increased taxes to the consumer by increasing prices a. Consumers bearing the higher burden of taxes will have less disposable income and purchase less so Businesses will have less profit. i) This statement expressed by Noble Prize winning economists b. Two-thirds of the economy is supported by consumer spending G. Other tax initiatives 1. Definitions: Regressive vs. Progressive taxes a. Progressive tax: Increase on those who are able/can afford to pay b. Regressive tax: Increase on those who are least able/can t afford to pay 2. Governor Brown s Initiative a. Half regressive/half progressive b. Estimated $123 cost to average tax payer c. Funds would go to K-14 education, public safety, social services and corrections 3. Our Children, Our Future : Molly Munger a. Partially regressive, partially progressive b. Raises income tax on all but poorest tax payers for 12 years i) Expires 2024 c. Funds designated for K-12 education and early childhood programs

Page 6 of 6 4. Think Long a. Reduces personal income taxes for all, extends sales taxes, reduces corporate tax rate b. Essentially continues loopholes and protections for those not currently paying their fair share. H. Participation and Support 1. Will be asking teachers to actively educate parents, friends, and neighbors 2. If CFT finds that their initiative is not viable, then CFT will support the Governor s initiative proposal. You said the state is not broke and that there is money in the state. It sounds like the state has funds and we just need to find a way to access them [instead of raising taxes]. When I say the state has money, I mean the people of the state, those that are living in the state. Is it possible that all those initiatives will get on the ballot? That could happen. Conflicting ballot measures have been on the ballot before. The people could vote the best one in or they could be so confused that they vote no on all of them. Is there any state that has higher taxes on the wealthy than we do? Yes. New Jersey and New York. However, CA has the highest percentage of billionaires living in the state. Would a letter campaign to the Governor help? Yes. It would. Meeting adjourned: 5:30 p.m. Next meeting: February 9, 2012 Submitted by Naomi Lukaszewski, PFT Secretary