[Ohiogift] Impact of Kasich veto

[Kim Doucher]

Inasmuch as the line-item veto was as to staffing requirements only, I
believe there may actually have been non-dastardly motivation on the
Governor's part.  Recall that people are already screaming bloody murder
about personnel costs within districts.  From a simple strategic
perspective, it makes sense to separate the cost of gifted ed programs from
the cost of gifted ed program staff.

 

To my understanding, some districts already have a program coordinator
position in their TO but did not necessarily fill it with a gifted-certified
administrator (which they would have been required to do under the pre-veto
language).  Those districts that did not already have a program coordinator
position within their TO would be required to create the position and then
fill it with a gifted-certified administrator.  That's likely to confuse
taxpayers and draw focus away from the need for the programs themselves (and
onto added personnel costs).

 

By splitting the two concerns and by saving the 'programs' but cutting the
'staff' piece, the cost isn't as dramatic and it's not borne as 'personnel
costs.'  As such, the gifted ed language is likely to be much more secure in
the next budget cycle (and in proposed legislative changes).

 

There's no question that the programming won't be nearly as effective
(perhaps ineffective in some areas?) without the appropriate GIC in place
but it's a good opportunity to get people comfortable with the gifted ed
mandate first.  Just as with IDEA special ed programming, the key here (in
my humble opinion) is to establish a 'base comfort level' with the notion of
gifted ed as a non-discretionary piece of the education process.

 

Bottom line:  There do exist some rational bases for JK's line-item
decision.  Whether or not he used them in his decision-making is unclear.
I'm not at all a mind-reader and I've been particularly unsuccessful in
understanding many of JK's actions but I'd prefer to win a small war than a
big battle.

 

-Kim Doucher

 

From: ohiogift-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
[mailto:ohiogift-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of
anngift at aol.com
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 9:51 AM
To: heather.cachat at swcs.us
Cc: Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: [Ohiogift] Impact of Kasich veto

 

The gifted unit and identification funding is still in the formula. What is
not there is the very specific language that indicated that unit funding for
coordinators would only be used for coordinators and the unit funding for
gifted intervention specialists would only be used for gifted intervention
specialists. It is clear that the governor's intent was to untether any ties
between specific spending of gifted funds to personnel. However, the unit
funding formula is still intact, which is by definition funding tied to
gifted personnel. And, while watered down the subgroup accountability
section still indicates that subgroup spending is to be spent on the
subgroups. 

I don't think the removal of the language actually stops the ODE unit
allocation process as was done in previous years. The veto just makes things
very murky. I'm sure if the governor had his way he would moved the formula
back to the $50 per ADM, but the governor can only delete language in a line
item veto. He cannot change language. If he deleted the formula he would
have decreased funding to districts, which would have caused a bigger upset.


The bottom line is that with over 5500 pages in this bill, there were only
22 line item vetoes, and gifted children were targeted. That is a strong
anti-gifted message.   

--Ann



 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Heather Cachat <heather.cachat at swcs.us>
To: anngift <anngift at aol.com>
Cc: Ohiogift <Ohiogift at lists.service.ohio-state.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jul 1, 2013 9:17 am
Subject: Re: [Ohiogift] Kasich officially decides gifted children don't
matter

Ann, How will this affect kids, personnel, and districts? I want to help
others understand what means (and to an extent clarify for myself).  For the
next two years will districts have to support programming out of their
general funds? Will there be no support for mandatory testing?

 

Heather Cachat

Gifted Intervention Specialist

Holt Crossing Intermediate

www.swcs.us/~heather.cachat

www.diigo.com/user/hacachat

Twitter: http://twitter.com/HeatherCachat

 

<anngift at aol.com> writes:

#2 on Kasich veto list: 

 

gifted funding spent on gifted children. 

 

Not sure I have anything else to say except for that no 1 on the list was
some business about spider monkeys... Yeah. 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/ohiogift/attachments/20130701/7cfd86b6/attachment.html>