The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => Local & State Politics => Topic started by: Conan71 on October 24, 2016, 10:07:23 am



Title: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2016, 10:07:23 am
This thread was started by Moderator to continue an off-topic conversation from another thread. The other posts are being moved to this thread.  You guys can take off topic to a whole new level!

State Question 779 is a 1% sales tax increase that is to be designated to education, including teacher pay raises.
https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_One_Percent_Sales_Tax,_State_Question_779_(2016)

Discuss.

- Moderator

- - - - -

--=: First Post Split from Old Topic :=--




I expect that, at least in Oklahoma, the funds that should be allocated to roads are spent elsewhere.  I don't like toll roads but it is a convenient way to build roads.  I grew up in PA with the PA Turnpike.  There were also some toll roads in NJ from the Philadelphia area to the NJ Seashore around Atlantic City and Cape May.  There was also the NJ Turnpike if you wanted to go to NY.

Education:  I believe that if 779 passes that all that money raised by the increased sales tax will be spent on education.  I also believe that money already being spent on education will be re-allocated elsewhere.  We have had at least 2 things that were supposed to fix education spending forever.  1017 (I think that was the bill/law number) was the first I remember (our family moved here in 1971).   The lottery was the second.

Which explains why I won’t vote for 779.  One thing we can always count on is our legislature to champion education, find a “better” way to fund it, then once that passes, they divert old means elsewhere.

And David, ODOT already struggles to develop and maintain the roads it has in its inventory now.  I don’t mind the turnpike user fees so much, it generally does provide a much better roadway.  I freaking love the road from the Cleveland exit to I-35 now!


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Hoss on October 24, 2016, 10:41:41 am
Which explains why I won’t vote for 779.  One thing we can always count on is our legislature to champion education, find a “better” way to fund it, then once that passes, they divert old means elsewhere.

And David, ODOT already struggles to develop and maintain the roads it has in its inventory now.  I don’t mind the turnpike user fees so much, it generally does provide a much better roadway.  I freaking love the road from the Cleveland exit to I-35 now!

My reason for not voting for it is that a sales tax is incredibly regressive...it affects those who can afford it least (middle and lower income Oklahomans).  Legislators in OKC need to get off their asses and figure out how to fund teacher raises without a sales tax.

But your reason is valid too.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 24, 2016, 02:28:08 pm
But why do we need tolls to fund this? How misallocated are our tax dollars? Same question I have with education. It just doesn't add up. Frustrating.


You already know how misallocated our tax dollars are - just by the existence of a turnpike authority.  No, it doesn't add up and never has added up - it has ALWAYS been about political patronage, cronyism, and back scratching...as in, "If you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours...."

Not sure how it is today, but letting people buy turnpike bonds has traditionally been one of the best ways the elected state officials have to "return the favor" to their 'friends'....you or I cannot (could not?) buy a turnpike bond.  The relatively high interest paid with tax exempt status made them a very attractive investment.  As of about year 2000, I have only known 2 people who were able to get those bonds.  Maybe things have changed in last 15 years - don't know for sure.

2015 CAFR states 3.859% interest paid.  Whole lot better than 0.5% on a savings account...and tax exempt!!

And they are getting ready to raise tolls again...






Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Red Arrow on October 24, 2016, 04:51:53 pm
My reason for not voting for it is that a sales tax is incredibly regressive...it affects those who can afford it least (middle and lower income Oklahomans). 

Sales tax wouldn't be quite so regressive if food and clothes were exempted.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: davideinstein on October 24, 2016, 06:45:40 pm
Sales tax wouldn't be quite so regressive if food and clothes were exempted.

I'm a yes lean on 779, but it just seems like another rip off. What happened to the lottery money? Now we have two regressive taxes?


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 24, 2016, 07:57:53 pm
I'm a yes lean on 779, but it just seems like another rip off. What happened to the lottery money? Now we have two regressive taxes?

It seems like it because it is.  They’ve got the teachers frothing at the mouth thinking they will end up with significant raises if the package passes.  An extra $40 a month or so raise wouldn’t really puff my skirt.  The part which is telling to me is using the phrase “lock box” in the ads.  You know that is total bullshit.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: davideinstein on October 24, 2016, 08:08:56 pm
It seems like it because it is.  They’ve got the teachers frothing at the mouth thinking they will end up with significant raises if the package passes.  An extra $40 a month or so raise wouldn’t really puff my skirt.  The part which is telling to me is using the phrase “lock box” in the ads.  You know that is total bullshit.

Provisions in it that weren't in the lottery one though. I just want education funded...


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Hoss on October 24, 2016, 10:54:08 pm
Provisions in it that weren't in the lottery one though. I just want education funded...

Then make the state legislators make the tough decisions.  Sales tax is too easy but it hurts those who can't afford it.  Another way.  I'm vehemently opposed.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 25, 2016, 08:01:11 am
Provisions in it that weren't in the lottery one though. I just want education funded...

"Provisions" are great so long as this legislature or future ones don’t shut off the spigot from prior funding sources once the new one is established.  The problem is, Oklahoma’s legislature has the worst or near worst track record for education funding.  They have not earned any trust that they are really committed to it or when a budget crisis hits that they won’t hit education first while ensuring that nice production tax breaks for the energy sector will be protected.

The other issue I do not like about a full penny sales tax increase aside from it being regressive, is a sales tax of more than 9.5% in Tulsa will kill convention business.  This is a factor planners consider prior to awarding their shows and conventions to cities.  Tulsa would become one of the nation’s cities with the highest sales tax rate.  Our sales tax revenue growth is already pretty flat without coming up with new ways to shoo off shows and conventions.

Yet one more issue I have is 19.25% going to the State Regents.  As long as they continue to fund and operate schools like Panhandle State in Goodwell while cock-blocking Tulsa’s true need for a four year public university, I’m very reluctant to provide more funding which ends up in the hands of the OKC metro and funding the rural sprawl of lesser colleges.

Finally, would a $5000 per year teacher raise really improve the educational outcome for our kids?  I realize a raise would stop some of the brain drain, but in some cases aren’t we just rewarding the very worst instructors with a non-merit pay raise?

And please, people:  quit holding your breath over the legislature ever dropping sales tax on food and clothing.  It will never happen in our lifetime.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: patric on October 25, 2016, 09:28:55 am
I'm a yes lean on 779, but it just seems like another rip off. What happened to the lottery money? Now we have two regressive taxes?

Our states bait-and-switch education funding is definitely in need of discussion.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19689.msg312376#msg312376


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 09:43:28 am
It seems like usual, you guys have painted us all into a corner. There will be no action by legislators to bring our standing up from the VERY WORST funding of education of all the country. None. Yet, you can bet the legislature will remain dominated by the worst supporters of public education we've ever had because we just vote red or redder. That's two strikes. Then we sucker for the high fastball when we say vote no on a sales tax that goes to teachers because the taxes will be regressive, too high for business, and besides its the legislatures job to fund it properly and it unfairly rewards those teachers who didn't bolt for Texas and Kansas so are therefore responsible for the poor student education outcomes.

To me that means no action and at least two more years of no action til we can get Failin' out of office to provide some leadership outside of religious and moral issues. However, if you do vote to support what will likely be a two year at most tax increase dedicated to education, we mitigate the teacher loss, reward college graduates for deciding on a career of self sacrifice for future outcomes AND you send a message to the dumbassed legislature that we are serious about education and are willing to fund it ourselves if they won't. Next, THEY have to think about their phoney baloney jobs and pay schedules.

So, nothing or self flagellation for the greater good. I'm voting for it.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 25, 2016, 10:57:39 am
Provisions in it that weren't in the lottery one though. I just want education funded...


This won't do it.  The have Toby Keith lying about a "lockbox" - well, that was what 1017 did and the lottery goes to education "as promised".  What is missing is on the other side, where the State Clown Show can still divert all the general fund money's they want to other things - as they do all the time.  So, yeah, the sales tax will go to schools mostly, but it will be nowhere near enough to cover it completely and funding will still be cut as long as the electorate keeps putting these a-holes back in office.

As for Toby, well like all the narcissistic rich guys who blather on about tax cuts, he wants them cut as long as they are his taxes getting cut.  IF we were to properly run the fiscal house we live in he would lose his extra 1/4% income tax cut that Failin' and Clown Show gave the richest among us.  And since he likely buys all his big ticket items online to avoid sales tax - if he is even 'in town' when he buys stuff - well, it won't hurt him to have that extra 1% added onto the rest of us.



Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Townsend on October 25, 2016, 11:26:35 am
I'm pretty sure 779 will cause an increase in internet sales and a decrease in local shopping.

On the other hand, is this subject on the correct thread?


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 12:11:11 pm
Probably should be moved. Sapulpa has one of the highest tax rates IIRC. I wonder how its affected them? If it increases internet purchases then that adds even more pressure to legislators to come clean and do their jobs or there won't be enough tax collections to pay their rent. I have no doubt that if this passes, the legislators will do a shell game with it like they did the lottery and the casinos. But there are only two options: vote them out or be the laughingstock of the country with the brain drain accelerating.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: swake on October 25, 2016, 01:10:07 pm

This won't do it.  The have Toby Keith lying about a "lockbox" - well, that was what 1017 did and the lottery goes to education "as promised".  What is missing is on the other side, where the State Clown Show can still divert all the general fund money's they want to other things - as they do all the time.  So, yeah, the sales tax will go to schools mostly, but it will be nowhere near enough to cover it completely and funding will still be cut as long as the electorate keeps putting these a-holes back in office.

As for Toby, well like all the narcissistic rich guys who blather on about tax cuts, he wants them cut as long as they are his taxes getting cut.  IF we were to properly run the fiscal house we live in he would lose his extra 1/4% income tax cut that Failin' and Clown Show gave the richest among us.  And since he likely buys all his big ticket items online to avoid sales tax - if he is even 'in town' when he buys stuff - well, it won't hurt him to have that extra 1% added onto the rest of us.



I am a reluctant vote yes. I don’t like sales tax, it’s regressive and hurts poor people. I would rather income tax and property tax pay for schools.

That said, I have a  child in school right now, my son is a sophomore and things are really bad right now. I want schools to improve for him before he graduates and I really don’t see any changes in the near future here without this tax. Republicans have pushed this state to the brink over the last 10 years and still the public laps up their rhetoric. The very poor people that this tax will hurt are mostly Trump voters.

99% of Trump bumper stickers are on aging beater cars and pickups with dents and a couple of different paint colors. I’ve seen exactly one Trump sticker on a nice car, a new Audi on Sunday with the larger “Proud Deplorable” sticker larger than the Trump sticker, so you know right where his head is.

I know that over time the legislature will steal these funds and fund even more tax breaks for the rich. I’m certainly not rich but I do ok and those very tax breaks will mean more money in my pocket than those sales taxes will take.

So selfishly, I will vote yes, for my son mostly and as an added benefit I get a slightly lower taxes. And I get to stick it to dumb Trump voters. I guess in this case it’s a win/win/win.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 25, 2016, 01:52:58 pm
I am a reluctant vote yes. I don’t like sales tax, it’s regressive and hurts poor people. I would rather income tax and property tax pay for schools.

That said, I have a  child in school right now, my son is a sophomore and things are really bad right now. I want schools to improve for him before he graduates and I really don’t see any changes in the near future here without this tax. Republicans have pushed this state to the brink over the last 10 years and still the public laps up their rhetoric. The very poor people that this tax will hurt are mostly Trump voters.

99% of Trump bumper stickers are on aging beater cars and pickups with dents and a couple of different paint colors. I’ve seen exactly one Trump sticker on a nice car, a new Audi on Sunday with the larger “Proud Deplorable” sticker larger than the Trump sticker, so you know right where his head is.

I know that over time the legislature will steal these funds and fund even more tax breaks for the rich. I’m certainly not rich but I do ok and those very tax breaks will mean more money in my pocket than those sales taxes will take.

So selfishly, I will vote yes, for my son mostly and as an added benefit I get a slightly lower taxes. And I get to stick it to dumb Trump voters. I guess in this case it’s a win/win/win.



Sadly, the sales tax wouldn't kick in fast enough to help your kid no matter what.  And since for every $100 million in revenue the sales tax brings in the legislature is going to divert $110 million from general fund education moneys to something else, this is gonna actually make the situation worse.   Just based on past experience for the last 40 to 50 years or so.

And no, it won't - tax breaks give you more money than sales tax.  You would need to make a million a year to come out on that deal.  The cut is 1/4%. And doesn't affect you except for all annual income above about $55,000.  So if you make $100,000 a year, that extra 1/4% on $45,000 is saving you a couple hundred bucks.  Or about $20,000 in retail spending equivalent.  Well, if ya don't spend more than about $20k a year retail, you will be good....  I want to pay that extra 1/4%, and I want Toby Keith to have to pay it too!!  He certainly gets a whole lot more back from all the lower income people in this state who buy his pitiful excuse for entertainment...!!

The sales tax is 1% - on everything you buy!!


You will have to move to Missouri or Arkansas to help him.  And if you move the family to Joplin area or Fayetteville, you can come back and stay in Tulsa area during the week and go home on weekends to see the family.  It's only about 2 1/2 years...anyone can handle that!!  If ya care about your kids enough....

Get a decent used travel trailer and just put it in an RV park and rent by the month.  Excellent solution.  At the end of the 2 1/2 year sentence, you can move the family back if you want...or get a better job in a different state...!


Luckily for the kids future, all my kids and grand kids have bailed on Oklahoma except for the last 2.  One of those is being raised by a mother who is pretty amazing...well, they both are, but one gets a lot of additional after school attention!  A LOT!!  He will do well in spite of the Oklahoma schools!!  And the other is in kindergarten and I have told them they are gonna have to move - Joplin or Fayetteville are both good options...both parents are in medical field so can easily get jobs.

Bottom line - we will continue to see the Republicontin's elected here.  Trump polls 60% if that gives you any hints/indications.  And education will continue to be last on their priority list - we will remain behind Mississippi for the foreseeable future.  And we don't even need to talk about all the other infrastructure items - destruction of public education is enough.


This needs repeating;

"When you wage war on the public schools, you're attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You're not a conservative, you're a vandal.”    - Garrison Keillor


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: erfalf on October 25, 2016, 02:08:10 pm
In reality nothing will improve even if passed immediately. The same teachers that already work there will get raises. Do you think things will improve due to that? Maybe in the long term (maybe).


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: swake on October 25, 2016, 02:21:38 pm
In reality nothing will improve even if passed immediately. The same teachers that already work there will get raises. Do you think things will improve due to that? Maybe in the long term (maybe).

It will encourage teachers to stay and lead to the ability for schools to hire for empty positions.

For example, Glenpool schools do not offer foreign languages anymore. Not even Spanish. They lost their last Spanish teacher last year and have been unable to find a new one. They have classes in Creek that I think are partially funded by the tribe, but no foreign languages at all. Most all good colleges require at least two years of a foreign language to be admitted so every student at GPS is sealed off from good colleges. All of them.

Glenpool isn't some tiny school in western Oklahoma with graduating classes of 40 students. This is a good sized suburban school district. 


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: erfalf on October 25, 2016, 02:29:51 pm
All I meant was in the immediate term (in order for your kid to get some benefit).



Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: swake on October 25, 2016, 02:50:04 pm
All I meant was in the immediate term (in order for your kid to get some benefit).



Why would it not impact next year's budget that is already predicted to have another huge hole in it?


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 25, 2016, 03:11:35 pm
Why would it not impact next year's budget that is already predicted to have another huge hole in it?

I have yet to find one study which shows an increase in teacher pay directly correlates to a child’s academic success.  I honestly cannot see any way there is any major benefit to your son with 2 1/2 years left in high school if this bill passes.

In the 10 years I’ve followed your posts here, I’ve come to detect you and your wife are very devoted parents.  That right there is the biggest precursor of a child’s academic success.

Where funding has doubled in very troubled previously under-funded districts, the results are not dramatically different:

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/04/25/468157856/can-more-money-fix-americas-schools

The irony of a 1% sales tax hike is even with a $5000 raise, the regressiveness of it will even hit those it intends to support.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 25, 2016, 03:13:41 pm
THEY have to think about their phoney baloney jobs and pay schedules.



Kudos!  Since we have drifted this far, might as well go full Blazing Saddles!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTmfwklFM-M


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: swake on October 25, 2016, 03:21:03 pm
I have yet to find one study which shows an increase in teacher pay directly correlates to a child’s academic success.  I honestly cannot see any way there is any major benefit to your son with 2 1/2 years left in high school if this bill passes.

In the 10 years I’ve followed your posts here, I’ve come to detect you and your wife are very devoted parents.  That right there is the biggest precursor of a child’s academic success.

Where funding has doubled in very troubled previously under-funded districts, the results are not dramatically different:

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/04/25/468157856/can-more-money-fix-americas-schools

The irony of a 1% sales tax hike is even with a $5000 raise, the regressiveness of it will even hit those it intends to support.

The current teacher pay is so low that Oklahoma schools are unable to hire qualified teachers. Many positions go unfilled. See my post about Glenpool.

As for my son, if he would remember to do his homework we would be golden. It's a work in progress. Where he's personally impacted is by class size. 35+ in high school for core classes. You know, the ones that really matter.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 25, 2016, 04:38:38 pm
I have yet to find one study which shows an increase in teacher pay directly correlates to a child’s academic success.  I honestly cannot see any way there is any major benefit to your son with 2 1/2 years left in high school if this bill passes.

In the 10 years I’ve followed your posts here, I’ve come to detect you and your wife are very devoted parents.  That right there is the biggest precursor of a child’s academic success.

Where funding has doubled in very troubled previously under-funded districts, the results are not dramatically different:

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/04/25/468157856/can-more-money-fix-americas-schools

The irony of a 1% sales tax hike is even with a $5000 raise, the regressiveness of it will even hit those it intends to support.


The increase in pay is an indirect benefit - we stop losing teachers, can fill the positions open now, leading to smaller class sizes which has repeatedly been shown to benefit a child's academic success. 

As for NPR reference, the one thing that made a huge difference to low income and inner city children - mostly black kids - was busing that happened in the 70's and 80's.  For 17 years there was forced busing that dramatically and absolutely without doubt showed dramatic improvements in academic performance of kids who were shipped around.  Also from an NPR report a couple of weeks ago.  Then it was stopped.

The biggest, most likely direct cause was access to better schools.  Facilities, teachers, equipment, supplies, etc.  All things being equal - as has been proven beyond all doubt - all kids get a boost and much better outcomes.   The big problem we have - and I mentioned this in a post a couple weeks ago about one of the guys I work with in one office moving to better school system neighborhood - is the inequality we have between schools and systems.  Even in the same district!  That is a place where more money has been shown to make a big difference.



Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 05:00:07 pm
I like to get that line in as often and as many places as I can. Its such a truism. ;D


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Red Arrow on October 25, 2016, 06:26:49 pm
And please, people:  quit holding your breath over the legislature ever dropping sales tax on food and clothing.  It will never happen in our lifetime.

I have no delusions about it ever happening but it would make the sales tax less regressive.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Red Arrow on October 25, 2016, 06:31:17 pm
However, if you do vote to support what will likely be a two year at most tax increase dedicated to education,

How long have you lived in Oklahoma?


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 25, 2016, 07:18:42 pm
Here's an interesting dichotomy:

I left a public school for a private school (Casica Hall) prior to my sophomore year.  A few teachers confided that CH's pay was a year or two behind TPS.  One had recently moved over from Nathan Hale to Cascia.  All said the reason they were willing to work for less was because the working conditions were so much better for a teacher.  Kid's parents were making a significant investment in their child's education, they took an interest in making sure their child got the most out of that education.

We assume the only reason positions aren't being filled is due to pay issues.  The job situation in Oklahoma these days is not such that most people with a bachelor degree have carte blanche for a $40-$50K job.  Keep in mind, most teachers work on average about 10 months out of the year.

Could it be that a lack of technology or adequate supplies for students along with parental apathy creates an undesireable working environment?  If funding were directed toward things that matter like the latest learning technology and training and making sure teachers were not left to purchase classroom supplies out of their own pocket  might we see better outcomes and better instruction with less turn-over?

Certainly, being able to pay enough for the best talent is important.  Blanket raises for everyone from the best talent to the most jaded teacher counting down their days until they retire is not a policy which ensures success.

I've had some sort of merit-based pay my entire adult working career.  The harder I work and the more dedicated I am to what I do, I'm rewarded for it.  I've never been a production line guy or done an occupation that my check never changes regardless of performance since I was 20 or so. 

If I were a teacher, I don't understand the motivation a sudden $5000 per year raise would give me to be a better teacher when I still don't have what I need to teach the kids and their parents still don't give a sh!t because they are being sent to me to basically keep them out of trouble for 6 hours a day.  I'd be less likely to look to move to Arkansas or Texas, but I honestly don't know how that raise would change the way I reach out to the kids I taught with all else remaining the same.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 07:21:28 pm
Red, I thought about that phrase before writing it. Actually, my thought process is that it would have to be the most attractive low hanging fruit an incoming politician could identify. An onerous regressive tax that needed to be cut since the new legislators have found the voters will support education and thus found another more just way to fund that education. After all, 49 other states found a way to do so. So, they can both fund education and cut taxes at the same time. A politicians wet dream.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Red Arrow on October 25, 2016, 07:26:41 pm
Red, I thought about that phrase before writing it. Actually, my thought process is that it would have to be the most attractive low hanging fruit an incoming politician could identify. An onerous regressive tax that needed to be cut since the new legislators have found the voters will support education and thus found another more just way to fund that education. After all, 49 other states found a way to do so. So, they can both fund education and cut taxes at the same time. A politicians wet dream.

Even if the school sales tax was to be eliminated, it would be continued in another iteration since continuing it would not be a tax increase.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 08:01:13 pm
Here's an interesting dichotomy:

I left a public school for a private school (Casica Hall) prior to my sophomore year.  A few teachers confided that CH's pay was a year or two behind TPS.  One had recently moved over from Nathan Hale to Cascia.  All said the reason they were willing to work for less was because the working conditions were so much better for a teacher.  Kid's parents were making a significant investment in their child's education, they took an interest in making sure their child got the most out of that education.

We assume the only reason positions aren't being filled is due to pay issues.  The job situation in Oklahoma these days is not such that most people with a bachelor degree have carte blanche for a $40-$50K job.  Keep in mind, most teachers work on average about 10 months out of the year.

Could it be that a lack of technology or adequate supplies for students along with parental apathy creates an undesireable working environment?  If funding were directed toward things that matter like the latest learning technology and training and making sure teachers were not left to purchase classroom supplies out of their own pocket  might we see better outcomes and better instruction with less turn-over?

Certainly, being able to pay enough for the best talent is important.  Blanket raises for everyone from the best talent to the most jaded teacher counting down their days until they retire is not a policy which ensures success.

I've had some sort of merit-based pay my entire adult working career.  The harder I work and the more dedicated I am to what I do, I'm rewarded for it.  I've never been a production line guy or done an occupation that my check never changes regardless of performance since I was 20 or so. 

If I were a teacher, I don't understand the motivation a sudden $5000 per year raise would give me to be a better teacher when I still don't have what I need to teach the kids and their parents still don't give a sh!t because they are being sent to me to basically keep them out of trouble for 6 hours a day.  I'd be less likely to look to move to Arkansas or Texas, but I honestly don't know how that raise would change the way I reach out to the kids I taught with all else remaining the same.

You still have a lot of those old republican talking points in your dna. Coming from a parochial school graduate I'm sure that all makes sense to you. You got a great education obviously. Have you been in TPS classrooms lately? There is great new leadership from a superintendent that graduated from Tulsa Hale. She's made improvements in morale and operations.  The schools are pretty high tech. BT puts out great college material. Jenks public does pretty well. Edison is okay. The rest are struggling but tech doesn't make kids smarter anymore than great buildings do, its merely a tool. It is parental support and environment for sure. Inner city kids don't have as much of that as Cascia, BK or Holland Hall. So, what, we punish any teachers that work for them? When you send a fresh college grad to work at Marshall and he realizes he is a social worker, a source for lunch money for hungry kids, a source of basic materials, a teacher of kids with mental problems, a traffic director in the parking lot, and yet is responsible for the failure of something he has no control over? Then you pay less than Texas or Kansas? Kansas?? Well, you have a prescription for failure.

Have you sent kids to public schools? I just took a group from a struggling but improving west side grade school to Holland Hall. The contrast is striking. The perfect Holland Hall students are something to admire. Their school is manicured suburban college campus. They come from fine families. Wealthy families. White families. Asian families. They understand the concept of reaching out to less fortunate at a very young age. The west siders are blue collar, children of meth addicts, coping poor, black, Hispanic, blind, ADD and poorly dressed by comparison. Thankfully, the kids don't know that. The teachers work more than 8 a day and get two months off but their less than the rest of the country income is augmented by extra jobs and spousal jobs. Its stressful to deal with the public perception, the families, the administration and the lack of respect their state gives them.

Many are doing a fantastic job with the kids that the suburbs don't have to take, (and don't encourage them to come unless they run like a college half back). And don't get me started on Special Needs teachers who have the craziest jobs ever created.  Do you spend much time talking with TPS teachers? I'm guessing not. Engineers, accountants, teachers all have four year degrees. Yet only teachers are expected to be judged so harshly on their work when the company is performing poorly. If we were to take your logic, then engineers are only worth what they create, fix, design, or operate. So, no need to research market pay, simply put them on the job at less than surrounding state pay and if your company does well, then pay them more. If it doesn't, pay them less or grade them on their "productivity". Only it doesn't work like that. An engineer costs what the market in our area is willing to pay. Hard to find engineers in particular fields whether they are good or not. Of course, you can fire them if you truly can justify it but its not likely. If you don't like that example, choose a career. Most operate on that basis.

So, I don't see the dichotomy. The teachers that moved to Texas and Kansas weren't necessarily the best, they were the ones that could. No family to hold them here, no husband or one that could relocate, no kids, no roots. Nor will they find a significant difference in public schools in those states. They left for more money, more support from their public and a chance to pay off student loans and have a life. Something I think you can identify with. You wouldn't work for less than you think you're worth. $5000 will not be enough to make up for their working conditions but they can't all be absorbed by private schools. It will be enough to give them some self respect and make them think twice about living in ...Kansas.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 08:03:14 pm
Even if the school sales tax was to be eliminated, it would be continued in another iteration since continuing it would not be a tax increase.

Maybe. But I have lived here my whole life. We cut taxes to get elected, to stay elected and to reward the oil companies for their perceived risk. I don't think the voters will have forgotten the raise in taxes in two years. I think they will run on it as a selling point.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Red Arrow on October 25, 2016, 08:16:08 pm
But I have lived here my whole life.

I actually knew that.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: AquaMan on October 25, 2016, 08:35:43 pm
I meant to accent the ...because I HAVE lived here my whole life...

Not something I'm particularly proud of though. I could have used a bit wider view of the world when I was younger. That's why I married a Wisconsin girl I guess.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: erfalf on October 26, 2016, 07:26:32 am
Aqua,

You seem to be saying that we need more market influenced prices (pay) for teachers but what we have is so far from a market based system. Yes that engineer is going to get "market" rate. But he only maintains that is he produces according to the expectations of his employer. What you are saying is unfair for teachers is exactly how it works in the market based economy. But teachers unions don't fight for those sorts of things. They fight for everyone and that is going to be the problem. If you want a a more market based pay scale then you are going to have to set the workers free. But that won't happen.

Conan,

Regarding teacher pay/work environment. Look at major metro areas...Chicago/D.C./New York. In a lot of cases the starting teacher pay is dramatically higher than other areas (double in some cases). Because no one wants those jobs. The state essentially has to buy the workers.

In Oklahoma, generally this hasn't been a problem, until the recent teacher shortages. I don't know this for a fact, but I am guessing the number of degrees we issue for education related fields hasn't dropped off, so in this case (only recently) does the market seem to be saying we are paying too little. But I have heard the call for teacher pay increases dating much further back than the last year or two obviously.

This next comment isn't necessarily tied to teachers, but just human nature:
It's a cold slap in the face sometimes when people realize that their marketable value isn't really all that high. That they are replaceable. I tell my team of rather low paid workers that replacement value is something their managers think about, and unless they can show that they add value that is generally difficult to replace, then they will have a ceiling on what they earn. This is really difficult to explain to people that aren't high flyers, that are content with $12/hour. There is a completely different mindset. Prior to my current job, all my co-workers were degreed and career driven. This has been a 180, and you really have to "teach" people how to be motivated. It seems against human nature but apparently it is not.

Also, I may be wrong, but I understood there to be NO sunset clause on this tax and it will be in the constitution. So it would seem the revocation of this sales tax would need an amendment to the constitution.

When googling something I came across this that I had honestly never heard before:

Quote
In 1907, Oklahoma's constitution was the longest governing document in the world. It was regularly amended, the first time being in the same election in which the constitution was ratified. The constitution currently has over 150 amendments.[


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 26, 2016, 10:08:14 am
Erfalf,
I just read the part you addressed to me and its nonsense. Literally doesn't make any sense from a business standpoint. You seem to think that the market is somehow polluted by union representation when in reality, the lack of unions artificially enhances the corporate power to administer a market. Markets work best when they are balanced, not skewed to one side or the other. But to be fair, you repeated one point I made as though it was yours, "he only maintains that job if he produces", and left out the part that negates your assumption. The demand for specific degrees in the market is overcome because of economic constraints. There is only so much a company feels it wants to pay for a hard to find degree. Most companies know that number and will only pay a little more or a little less to get that candidate. In effect they collude. The market for that degree would normally boost the asking price but since degreed candidates are rarely unionized, the companies work together to keep pay scales in line. So, the candidate has little incentive to move around other than work environment. Artificial market pricing. The real loser is the industry that does these shenanigans, and they don't all do it. Then it hurts the larger economy as well. What incentive is there for investing in a degree when the average engineer gets paid the same as the idiot engineer and there is no way to be compensated for the real demand in the marketplace? None. So you get Dilbert style engineering companies. Same with teachers. Only with teachers the boss is government and they repress the market because they represent the skinflint red state voters.

I saw it in the oil company I worked for, I saw it in advertising and I see it now in education and healthcare. Teachers are degreed candidates that earned the right to unionize but their unions are weak, political and too close to their opponents. However, they provide other protections and benefits besides compensation negotiation. Freeing the teachers from unions will simply give them no leverage at all.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: cannon_fodder on October 26, 2016, 10:54:02 am
If we are going to have this discussion, lets inject the actual data:


Teachers in Tulsa make, on average, $44k per year.  (http://oklahomawatch.org/2014/04/21/which-schools-pay-teachers-the-most-and-least/)  Thats close to the state average.

Starting pay with a BA is $32k, a Masters is $33k. Max with a BA is $49k, MA is $52K. There is no performance bonuses. A teacher with a masters and 5 years of experience makes $36k per year.

Benefits include healthcare  (http://www.nctq.org/docs/Tulsa_BenefitsTeacher_2011_Summary.pdf)for the teacher, and dental and vision for ~$50 a month. Adding a child adds about $400 a month (http://www.tulsaschools.org/insurance), a spouse adds a bit more. They are given various plans to choose from.

Retirement benefits (https://www.ok.gov/TRS/documents/Fall%202016%20Retirement%20Planning%20Presentation%20.pdf) are included. They used to be very generous, now the employee contribution is 7% per year and the state match is a wild formula based on years served. If you now retire before the age of 62, you face significant penalties regardless of years of service (50% penalty if you retire at 55).   The averaged retired teacher in Oklahoma sees a benefit of $20k per year. Given that the teacher pays in 7%, this means the state match is minimal and it really isn't much of a benefit anymore.

A teacher is required to work 180 days per year, minimum 7 days per year, and is not eligible for overtime. If you grade papers at home, come in early, stay late, or whatever... there is no overtime (unlike police where overtime is expected and unpaid services are forbidden by contract). The contracted minimum hours per workyear is 1260 hours (time in classroom).

I saw no allowance for misc. supplies - so I guess the adage about teachers equipping their own classrooms is true (again, contrast that other city workers like police and fire)?

Great resource for teacher pay/benefits:  http://www.nctq.org/districtPolicy/contractDatabase/district.do?id=98 , and you can compare Tulsa to many, many other districts in the state and around the country.


For perspective...

A starting teacher in Tulsa working the minimum number of hours and doing nothing outside of the school day will make about $25 per hours plus OK benefits.  The average teacher would be around $35/hour.  The ceiling for that teacher is effectively $40 per hour if they get a PHD. The bad news is you cannot get overtime and cannot get paid for all actual hours worked. Good news is you get summers and holidays off.

$25/hr puts them in line with lab techs, avionic techs, and sales reps. (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_46140.htm#00-0000)  Again, with a significant less annual take home (for better or worse). 50

$35 per hour is an architect, construction manager, occupational therapist, financial analyst, or network administrator.

$40/hr is a refinery operator, health and safety engineer, environmental engineer, chemical engineer, etc.

If the teachers work the minimum hours, they have little to complain about in way of per-hour pay. If the NEA is to believed, teachers spend on average 12 hours per week outside their contract hours. Or nearly 50 hours per week. (http://www.nea.org/home/12661.htm)  That would cut the realized hourly wage by 33%. knocking starting pay down to $19, then $26 and $32.  Starting pay would be similar to tool grinders, maintenance workers, and LPNs. The work year would then be 1692 hours.  (others  (http://www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2013/08/how-many-hours-do-educators-actually-work)claim the average teacher works 12 hours a day during the school year, and still others claim (http://www.michaelrobertson.com/archive.php?minute_id=357) the average pay is $70k and they only work 6.5 hours per day... so I gave the contract minimum in Tulsa and the NEA numbers, which seems reasonable for many teachers)

Is that enough per hour? Too little? Too much? Well, the market seems to be saying it isn't enough as we cannot hire enough certified teachers to fill our positions. Oklahoma is #48 out of 51 for teacher pay. Beating out South Dakota and Mississippi. The middle of the pack is about $50k per year. (http://www.teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state/)

Other considerations:

Respect - this goes to the benefits Cascia/Riverfield/BK have. The teachers have respect from the community and the parents, and mostly from the kids. That helps a ton.

Job security - teachers used to have excellent job security. TPS averages a layoff what, every 3 years or so?

Benefits - teachers used to have top level benefits, particularly retirement. It was part of the tradeoff to keep experienced teachers around when the top end as a math teacher will never be the top end of an accountant/bookkeeper.

Vacation time - summers off mean a lot to some people.

Education Importance - cultures that value education attract better teachers. That has to do with all of the above, it also has to do with driving people to the profession.
- - - -




Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: cannon_fodder on October 26, 2016, 11:06:51 am
What you are saying is unfair for teachers is exactly how it works in the market based economy. But teachers unions don't fight for those sorts of things. They fight for everyone and that is going to be the problem. If you want a a more market based pay scale then you are going to have to set the workers free. But that won't happen.

Currently Oklahoma cannot hire enough certified teachers for the package being offered. That's the market saying something is off.

For Tulsa Police and Fire, the norm is to have way more applicants than we will ever have positions. That's the market saying something is off.

Also worth noting that collective bargaining is part of the market. A company or a government is a huge collective. An industry or industry group is an even larger collective. A union is merely a collective of the workers. Where one worker basically has no voice, many together can and do.  Unions can overplay their hands and be a strongly negative force in many different ways. Just as employers can use their influence to be a negative force in many ways. History is littered with examples of both.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: swake on October 26, 2016, 11:29:16 am
Oklahoma has a long history of badly underfunded schools which resulted in too many bad teachers in classrooms. The decade before 2008 saw some progress in better funding but now after nearly a decade of cuts since the Great Recession (which mostly left Oklahoma untouched) we are now dead last nationally in spending on education and dead last in teacher pay. Last.

Oklahoma has for years now resorted to hiring teachers without basic qualifications to fill positions and today we are to the point where we can’t even hire enough unqualified teachers.

But keep arguing about teacher pay. Please. You are arguing against the very rules of supply and demand.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Hoss on October 26, 2016, 11:38:39 am
Oklahoma has a long history of badly underfunded schools which resulted in too many bad teachers in classrooms. The decade before 2008 saw some progress in better funding but now after nearly a decade of cuts since the Great Recession (which mostly left Oklahoma untouched) we are now dead last nationally in spending on education and dead last in teacher pay. Last.

Oklahoma has for years now resorted to hiring teachers without basic qualifications to fill positions and today we are to the point where we can’t even hire enough unqualified teachers.

But keep arguing about teacher pay. Please. You are arguing against the very rules of supply and demand.


I won't argue about pay..I agree teachers need better pay.  What I will argue about is the method.  A sales tax is a horrible way to do it.  It's just plain lazy.  Make legislators figure it out instead of playing into the fears of the people who stand to be least affected by it -- upper middle class and higher income households.

Oklahoma legislators have been derelict in their duties for funding teacher pay for years now.  It needs to end.  I plan to help that along by voting no.  Plain and simple.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: erfalf on October 26, 2016, 11:41:54 am
Aqua,

There is no collusion in pricing labor (at least in the private sector). There may seem to be normalization in the cost of certain kinds of labor. My main bit of evidence against it is the fact that if a worker wants a significant raise what do they do. They switch companies. It costs more to purchase proven producers. Often times they have to pay the new hire more than the guy that worked up through the ranks. Yes, it seems incredibly unfair, but it is what it is. You often just have to pay up to get that experience. I did it. I would have had to work probably 4 more years to get where I got just by switching jobs/companies. It happens all the time. It is the way society works now. Now, if you are a public school teacher and you want to leave Jenks for Moore, Moore admin pulls out the chart, sees teacher A has a masters and has been working for 5 years, and pays accordingly. Accordingly being what the union and state agreed to years ago. How is that going to be good for anyone?

Now that being said, I am totally in agreement that the market is certainly telling the state that currently, teachers are underpaid. However, that is a rather recent phenomenon. Whereas teachers (and unions) have been complaining about low wages for years. As cannon has shown, teachers (vs private industry) are not run out of the ballpark when it comes to pay. The starting pay is decent in my opinion, but the increases suck. I only made $17 out of college (but quickly increased $24 in just a couple of years) and I thought that was a decent job for a new hire. It wasn't a big corporate type. Of my friends that worked for "big oil" the going rate seemed to be about $24/hour for new hires (10 years ago mind you). My job was probably the equivalent of working for Cascia. It was pretty cushy, low stress, huge bonuses, tons of time off, very prestigious. Well not exactly like it, but you get the gist. (In reality I took the job/less money because the management was incredibly distinguished and it was a start up and that single job has been the catapult for the rest of my career, looking back it was the best decision I ever made).



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: erfalf on October 26, 2016, 11:42:33 am
I won't argue about pay..I agree teachers need better pay.  What I will argue about is the method.  A sales tax is a horrible way to do it.  It's just plain lazy.  Make legislators figure it out instead of playing into the fears of the people who stand to be least affected by it -- upper middle class and higher income households.

Oklahoma legislators have been derelict in their duties for funding teacher pay for years now.  It needs to end.  I plan to help that along by voting no.  Plain and simple.

I agree. I have felt like the sales tax idea was just throwing a dog a bone to say they did something. When in reality they did nothing.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: swake on October 26, 2016, 12:24:34 pm
I won't argue about pay..I agree teachers need better pay.  What I will argue about is the method.  A sales tax is a horrible way to do it.  It's just plain lazy.  Make legislators figure it out instead of playing into the fears of the people who stand to be least affected by it -- upper middle class and higher income households.

Oklahoma legislators have been derelict in their duties for funding teacher pay for years now.  It needs to end.  I plan to help that along by voting no.  Plain and simple.

I hate the idea of sales tax. It's bad, no doubt. Worse, schools are underfunded by about $2 billion and I'm afraid they are going to take this $600 million and call the funding crisis done. And then slowly leach the money back out of schools over time. But this is the only money schools are going to get out of the legislature. It's this or nothing until new people run the state and I simply don't see that happening any time in the foreseeable future.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Conan71 on October 26, 2016, 01:37:26 pm
Oklahoma has a long history of badly underfunded schools which resulted in too many bad teachers in classrooms. The decade before 2008 saw some progress in better funding but now after nearly a decade of cuts since the Great Recession (which mostly left Oklahoma untouched) we are now dead last nationally in spending on education and dead last in teacher pay. Last.

Oklahoma has for years now resorted to hiring teachers without basic qualifications to fill positions and today we are to the point where we can’t even hire enough unqualified teachers.

But keep arguing about teacher pay. Please. You are arguing against the very rules of supply and demand.


I’m not arguing about rules of supply and demand.  My whole premise is tenure-based pay increases rather than performance-based makes it impossible from a budgetary stand-point to attract, reward, and retain your best teachers (or producers in any other business) when you give pay raises to dead wood who could care less just because they have occupied a desk for x number of years.

For openers, you do a sliding scale based on certification (which is currently done with masters or doctorate) and GPA for those just out of college.  Then increases are a mix of tenure plus performance from either student standardized testing results or some other way to measure the teacher’s performance and student outcome.  If you give an employee incentives to perform well or go above and beyond the norm most will rise to the occasion.  It’s no different than performance bonuses in almost any other business as a reward for innovation and/or above average production.

I hate the idea of sales tax. It's bad, no doubt. Worse, schools are underfunded by about $2 billion and I'm afraid they are going to take this $600 million and call the funding crisis done. And then slowly leach the money back out of schools over time. But this is the only money schools are going to get out of the legislature. It's this or nothing until new people run the state and I simply don't see that happening any time in the foreseeable future.



Vote against it and make the legislature go back and make the hard choices they were paid to do. This most definitely was the laziest approach to a permanent solution possible and if the shortfall is $2 billion and this purports to only raise a little over one quarter of that, there really is no reason to vote for this, it is rewarding lazy work by the legislature if it passes.  

Take away nonsensical deductions from people who do not need them.  Raise personal income tax.  Figure out an equitable property tax increase.  These are all revenue streams which cannot be avoided by purchasing items in adjacent states or online to avoid paying taxes.

Oklahoma has no method to enforce use taxes and another poster observed yesterday this will only encourage more on-line purchases.  The idea of Tulsa having a 9.517% sales tax is freaking absurd.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 26, 2016, 02:49:06 pm
Aqua,

There is no collusion in pricing labor (at least in the private sector).


Yes.  There is.  In the private sector.  Companies have trade associations that get together all the time and compare notes to 'normalize' pay for job classifications.  That is one of the reasons why when you look for a new job, the first question they ask you is how much do you make now.  It is data gathering.  And there is data sharing between them.   Maybe you have not seen it, but I have been on  both sides -  'worker bee' and management.  I have seen it, and it is real - and yes, even here in 'little ole Tulsey-town'.  Any C-suite person telling you different is lying to you.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: erfalf on October 26, 2016, 02:51:36 pm

Yes.  There is.  In the private sector.  Companies have trade associations that get together all the time and compare notes to 'normalize' pay for job classifications.  That is one of the reasons why when you look for a new job, the first question they ask you is how much do you make now.  It is data gathering.  And there is data sharing between them.   Maybe you have not seen it, but I have been on  both sides -  'worker bee' and management.  I have seen it, and it is real - and yes, even here in 'little ole Tulsey-town'.  Any C-suite person telling you different is lying to you.



There is not the collusion to the degree you are implying. At big companies there are spreads of roughly 60% for a single job. That's not nearly the same as the "pricing charts" that teachers have to deal with. Making informed decisions is one thing, but setting a price is something entirely different.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 26, 2016, 03:00:20 pm
There is not the collusion to the degree you are implying. At big companies there are spreads of roughly 60% for a single job. That's not nearly the same as the "pricing charts" that teachers have to deal with. Making informed decisions is one thing, but setting a price is something entirely different.




It is setting a price.  That is why MS Engineer is hired at $70 to $120 k while the bosses are at 5 times that.  And yeah, there are exceptions - both high and low - but they are not the rule.

And whining all the time about the lack of STEM candidates.  There is NO lack of qualified, experienced, highly productive, STEM candidates!  There is only inadequate compensation in exchange for value received by the company.  Coupled with the expectation of 60 + hour work weeks.   When looking at ads, keep an eye out for the catch phrase, "fast paced environment".   "Agile" and "Scrum" are other key words in software world.  Translates as "sweat shop".  And they all lead to getting stuff out the door regardless of whether it is right or not.







Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: erfalf on October 26, 2016, 03:46:47 pm
You are looking in the wrong direction. Companies are not buying talent, they are buying labor (well most companies that is). They need X, Y, & Z done.  Why should there not be a market rate for that? What I call market rate, you call collusion. And companies cannot literally set the price and get the labor. It's a two way street you know. Now, who has the leverage entirely depends on the situation.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Hoss on October 26, 2016, 04:32:34 pm
I hate the idea of sales tax. It's bad, no doubt. Worse, schools are underfunded by about $2 billion and I'm afraid they are going to take this $600 million and call the funding crisis done. And then slowly leach the money back out of schools over time. But this is the only money schools are going to get out of the legislature. It's this or nothing until new people run the state and I simply don't see that happening any time in the foreseeable future.



Problem is this won't be money the legislature will be giving out...it will come out of Oklahoman's pockets at the cash register (so to speak).   And many Oklahomans that are lower income are already being squeezed.  It needs to stop.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: davideinstein on October 26, 2016, 07:25:17 pm
Two questions I'm asking myself today after the discussion started on here the other day.

Do I trust our state politicians with this money?

Should we have another regressive tax?

I'm now leaning no, but where will the accountability be to get education funded?


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 27, 2016, 08:01:41 am



I'm now leaning no, but where will the accountability be to get education funded?


Your vote for your state rep and senator.  Do you know who they are?  And more importantly what they are....?


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 27, 2016, 08:30:30 am
You still have a lot of those old republican talking points in your dna. Coming from a parochial school graduate I'm sure that all makes sense to you. You got a great education obviously. Have you been in TPS classrooms lately? There is great new leadership from a superintendent that graduated from Tulsa Hale. She's made improvements in morale and operations.  The schools are pretty high tech. BT puts out great college material. Jenks public does pretty well. Edison is okay. The rest are struggling but tech doesn't make kids smarter anymore than great buildings do, its merely a tool. It is parental support and environment for sure. Inner city kids don't have as much of that as Cascia, BK or Holland Hall. So, what, we punish any teachers that work for them?   When you send a fresh college grad to work at Marshall and he realizes he is a social worker, a source for lunch money for hungry kids, a source of basic materials, a teacher of kids with mental problems, a traffic director in the parking lot, and yet is responsible for the failure of something he has no control over? Then you pay less than Texas or Kansas? Kansas?? Well, you have a prescription for failure.  

Have you sent kids to public schools? I just took a group from a struggling but improving west side grade school to Holland Hall. The contrast is striking. The perfect Holland Hall students are something to admire. Their school is manicured suburban college campus. They come from fine families. Wealthy families. White families. Asian families. They understand the concept of reaching out to less fortunate at a very young age. The west siders are blue collar, children of meth addicts, coping poor, black, Hispanic, blind, ADD and poorly dressed by comparison. Thankfully, the kids don't know that. The teachers work more than 8 a day and get two months off but their less than the rest of the country income is augmented by extra jobs and spousal jobs. Its stressful to deal with the public perception, the families, the administration and the lack of respect their state gives them.

Many are doing a fantastic job with the kids that the suburbs don't have to take, (and don't encourage them to come unless they run like a college half back). And don't get me started on Special Needs teachers who have the craziest jobs ever created.  Do you spend much time talking with TPS teachers? I'm guessing not. Engineers, accountants, teachers all have four year degrees. Yet only teachers are expected to be judged so harshly on their work when the company is performing poorly. If we were to take your logic, then engineers are only worth what they create, fix, design, or operate. So, no need to research market pay, simply put them on the job at less than surrounding state pay and if your company does well, then pay them more. If it doesn't, pay them less or grade them on their "productivity". Only it doesn't work like that. An engineer costs what the market in our area is willing to pay. Hard to find engineers in particular fields whether they are good or not. Of course, you can fire them if you truly can justify it but its not likely. If you don't like that example, choose a career. Most operate on that basis.

So, I don't see the dichotomy. The teachers that moved to Texas and Kansas weren't necessarily the best, they were the ones that could. No family to hold them here, no husband or one that could relocate, no kids, no roots. Nor will they find a significant difference in public schools in those states. They left for more money, more support from their public and a chance to pay off student loans and have a life. Something I think you can identify with. You wouldn't work for less than you think you're worth. $5000 will not be enough to make up for their working conditions but they can't all be absorbed by private schools. It will be enough to give them some self respect and make them think twice about living in ...Kansas.

Your condescending and mis-guided assumptions about others never cease to make me chuckle, Aqua.

At the time I was at Cascia, a greater majority of the faculty I had more of a rapport with ranged from being a Bernie type liberal to just to the left of Stalin.  If anything, that is probably where some of my left leaning ideals come from.  More than anything, my ideas on merit-based pay have come from my working career not anything I was indoctrinated with in school.

Going back to what I see as a dichotomy of teachers being willing to accept lower pay for better working conditions:  Offer higher pay for those willing to make a difference in at risk schools in the poorer parts of the city, such as your example of Marshall.  BTW does extremely well as they more-or-less hand-pick their students and suburban systems do great too as you have a lot of parental support and participation in those districts.  But, you can continue to pay someone at a higher rate, but if their job is still insanely stressful, they may eventually opt to take a less stressful gig elsewhere.  Ergo, higher pay still is no guarantee of getting the best and brightest where you really need them within a district.

Both my daughters are public school graduates and public university grads, so yes, I know what it is to have a child in public schools in recent history.  I’m grateful they are out as I’m quite certain there has been a degradation of the public education system in the years between my time in school and theirs.  Whether that’s due to cuts in education spending, spending money in the wrong areas, or parental apathy has been on the rise over the last 30 years is an endless debate.

I realize capital funds which pay for stadiums and training facilities are different than operating funds which pay for teachers and support staff.  It still frosts me to drive past the Taj Mahal of a football stadium for the Stillwater Pioneers and hear anyone talk about needing teacher raises in Stillwater.  I totally get that having nice facilities to learn in and do extracurricular activities in are good for the learning environment and the morale of teachers and students alike but we seemed to do just fine with wooden bleachers, no air conditioning, and 20-30 student core classes back in my day.  I think too much emphasis has been placed on capital improvements amongst school systems while totally neglecting the real needs of the educational process (what those are is yet another endless debate).

I chatted last night with a life-long friend who is a middle school teacher at TPS.  While he would love to have a raise, he’s adamantly against SQ779 as he believes the funding mechanism is all wrong and he has zero trust that the legislature won’t figure out a way to make cuts again when the economy tanks again down the road or that some of his benefits package could be cut later.  I asked, from his perspective, do raises make teachers more effective?  He says absolutely not, but he said feeling appreciated via a pay raise does make a difference in teacher morale.  

How long that sense of appreciation lasts and whether that translates into becoming a more effective educator is anyone’s guess.  

Your last paragraph is well-reasoned.  Not every teacher who fled Oklahoma for a raise is necessarily the best of our educators, they simply had the freedom to travel.  By the same token, those people also had the freedom to go back to school and become educated for a different occupation for which they could be paid quite a bit more but they chose not to.

If there were empirical evidence which supports a clear correlation between higher teacher pay and better educational results, I could get behind every teacher raise ever proposed and I’d suggest first year pay should start in the $50K range.  There simply is no positive link anyone has been able to identify without logical refutation.  

Everyone wants to be paid a fair market value for their skills.  Some people end up under-paid and some simply have an over-inflated view of their skills.

Finally, and I’ll bow out and quit bloviating: voting yes on this measure rewards laziness in the Oklahoma Legislature.  This funding "crisis" has existed here for decades, so why make a poor choice now "just to get something”?  That is the worst logic of all to pass any bill or state question.  If the true shortfall for education is $2 billion then why pass a measure which comes up 66% short of the “true” need? Prior measures apparently have fallen short or rather the later actions of the legislature have nullified their benefit.  Let’s quit rewarding the cowardice of the GOP to raise income taxes and property taxes if there is such belief that revenue for education needs to be raised.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Hoss on October 27, 2016, 09:14:07 am
Your condescending and mis-guided assumptions about others never cease to make me chuckle, Aqua.

At the time I was at Cascia, a greater majority of the faculty I had more of a rapport with ranged from being a Bernie type liberal to just to the left of Stalin.  If anything, that is probably where some of my left leaning ideals come from.  More than anything, my ideas on merit-based pay have come from my working career not anything I was indoctrinated with in school.

Going back to what I see as a dichotomy of teachers being willing to accept lower pay for better working conditions:  Offer higher pay for those willing to make a difference in at risk schools in the poorer parts of the city, such as your example of Marshall.  BTW does extremely well as they more-or-less hand-pick their students and suburban systems do great too as you have a lot of parental support and participation in those districts.  But, you can continue to pay someone at a higher rate, but if their job is still insanely stressful, they may eventually opt to take a less stressful gig elsewhere.  Ergo, higher pay still is no guarantee of getting the best and brightest where you really need them within a district.

Both my daughters are public school graduates and public university grads, so yes, I know what it is to have a child in public schools in recent history.  I’m grateful they are out as I’m quite certain there has been a degradation of the public education system in the years between my time in school and theirs.  Whether that’s due to cuts in education spending, spending money in the wrong areas, or parental apathy has been on the rise over the last 30 years is an endless debate.

I realize capital funds which pay for stadiums and training facilities are different than operating funds which pay for teachers and support staff.  It still frosts me to drive past the Taj Mahal of a football stadium for the Stillwater Pioneers and hear anyone talk about needing teacher raises in Stillwater.  I totally get that having nice facilities to learn in and do extracurricular activities in are good for the learning environment and the morale of teachers and students alike but we seemed to do just fine with wooden bleachers, no air conditioning, and 20-30 student core classes back in my day.  I think too much emphasis has been placed on capital improvements amongst school systems while totally neglecting the real needs of the educational process (what those are is yet another endless debate).

I chatted last night with a life-long friend who is a middle school teacher at TPS.  While he would love to have a raise, he’s adamantly against SQ779 as he believes the funding mechanism is all wrong and he has zero trust that the legislature won’t figure out a way to make cuts again when the economy tanks again down the road or that some of his benefits package could be cut later.  I asked, from his perspective, do raises make teachers more effective?  He says absolutely not, but he said feeling appreciated via a pay raise does make a difference in teacher morale.  

How long that sense of appreciation lasts and whether that translates into becoming a more effective educator is anyone’s guess.  

Your last paragraph is well-reasoned.  Not every teacher who fled Oklahoma for a raise is necessarily the best of our educators, they simply had the freedom to travel.  By the same token, those people also had the freedom to go back to school and become educated for a different occupation for which they could be paid quite a bit more but they chose not to.

If there were empirical evidence which supports a clear correlation between higher teacher pay and better educational results, I could get behind every teacher raise ever proposed and I’d suggest first year pay should start in the $50K range.  There simply is no positive link anyone has been able to identify without logical refutation.  

Everyone wants to be paid a fair market value for their skills.  Some people end up under-paid and some simply have an over-inflated view of their skills.

Finally, and I’ll bow out and quit bloviating: voting yes on this measure rewards laziness in the Oklahoma Legislature.  This funding "crisis" has existed here for decades, so why make a poor choice now "just to get something”?  That is the worst logic of all to pass any bill or state question.  If the true shortfall for education is $2 billion then why pass a measure which comes up 66% short of the “true” need? Prior measures apparently have fallen short or rather the later actions of the legislature have nullified their benefit.  Let’s quit rewarding the cowardice of the GOP to raise income taxes and property taxes if there is such belief that revenue for education needs to be raised.

You pretty much summed up all my reasons for voting no, but my difference is that I really didn't have a reference to ask a current TPS teacher what their thoughts were on it (aside from a close cousin's wife who is an elementary school teacher).  Glad to know teachers for the most part aren't foaming at the mouth to get this passed.  I fear, however, that it will pass simply because of the fear-mongering.

I can currently afford the hike, however, I know many people who can't.  Or at the very least it will hurt those people to the extent it concerns them.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 27, 2016, 10:01:14 am
Its not going to pass. And, a lot of teachers would agree with my assessment of the teaching environment and its concomitant problems and still won't vote for it. But things have to be said, arguments have to be made and consequences predicted.

We all agree that the only way out of our state's demise is through education to allow the population to adjust to the change from a manufacturing economy to a technology economy. Problem is its happening now and education reform is a decades long process and we haven't even started in this state.

Conan. Man, learn to make executive summaries! It will take me days to read, digest, analyze and respond to your post. I'm sure there's good stuff there. Sometimes I think we get into debate mode and not realize this is real life happening.


Title: Re: Do We Really Need PikePass Anymore?
Post by: Conan71 on October 27, 2016, 10:02:18 am
You pretty much summed up all my reasons for voting no, but my difference is that I really didn't have a reference to ask a current TPS teacher what their thoughts were on it (aside from a close cousin's wife who is an elementary school teacher).  Glad to know teachers for the most part aren't foaming at the mouth to get this passed.  I fear, however, that it will pass simply because of the fear-mongering.

I can currently afford the hike, however, I know many people who can't.  Or at the very least it will hurt those people to the extent it concerns them.

I got a PM from another lifer of mine who is a TPS teacher, here’s what he had to say:

Quote
I'm teetering on this one because (as you point out) it's a regressive tax that will disproportionately effect lower incomes. Additionally I see amazing waste in education on a daily basis.  It will mean a raise for me (supposedly) but I'm not sure I have any confidence the money won't be pissed away on other crap!

The two teachers I referenced are in their early ’50’s and both started teaching about 15 years ago, so this was not their first occupation.

Based on these two examples, it would appear more experienced teachers have become very jaded and cynical about any raises or new benefits.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 27, 2016, 10:03:23 am
You are looking in the wrong direction. Companies are not buying talent, they are buying labor (well most companies that is). They need X, Y, & Z done.  Why should there not be a market rate for that? What I call market rate, you call collusion. And companies cannot literally set the price and get the labor. It's a two way street you know. Now, who has the leverage entirely depends on the situation.


As usual, I find little to agree with you on. But thanks for your input.  :)


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Conan71 on October 27, 2016, 10:03:48 am
Conan. Man, learn to make executive summaries! It will take me days to read, digest, analyze and respond to your post. I'm sure there's good stuff there. Sometimes I think we get into debate mode and not realize this is real life happening.

Hah!  It’ll never happen.  It takes me 10 minutes to describe a five minute jaunt to Quik Trip!  ;D


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: cannon_fodder on October 27, 2016, 12:24:52 pm
I'm against 779 for many reasons:

1) It is a regressive solution to a problem created by cutting taxes for the wealthiest;
2) Sales tax is an unpredictable and faltering source of revenue;
3) We've been sold fixes like this before (see lottery revenue!) only to see revenue from other source cut more than they are offset;
4) An increase in sales tax at the state level hurts cities or counties who may need to raise sales taxes in the future - remember, cities cannot raise general revenue funds from any other source, the state can; and
5) Ever increasing sales tax is bad economics. The poorest pay the most and the higher it is the more incentive to avoid it.

Lets see what happened with our last fix...

(https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14855926_10154661529548390_8332996482447332505_o.jpg)

So lets increase taxes on poor people more and then we can see if our state further cuts taxes for the wealthiest and continues to whine about having no money and cutting education. 


 
 


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Conan71 on October 27, 2016, 12:43:00 pm
I'm against 779 for many reasons:

1) It is a regressive solution to a problem created by cutting taxes for the wealthiest;
2) Sales tax is an unpredictable and faltering source of revenue;
3) We've been sold fixes like this before (see lottery revenue!) only to see revenue from other source cut more than they are offset;
4) An increase in sales tax at the state level hurts cities or counties who may need to raise sales taxes in the future - remember, cities cannot raise general revenue funds from any other source, the state can; and
5) Ever increasing sales tax is bad economics. The poorest pay the most and the higher it is the more incentive to avoid it.

Lets see what happened with our last fix...

So lets increase taxes on poor people more and then we can see if our state further cuts taxes for the wealthiest and continues to whine about having no money and cutting education. 


CF, our legislature vexes me so much it’s enough to make me want to move to another state...


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: TheArtist on October 27, 2016, 07:53:57 pm
I will be voting no.

I would like our teachers to get a raise, but raising our taxes by a full cent is not the way to do it.  

I do think raising the tax another full cent will hurt my business somewhat so it had better be for something really transformative.  This aint that. I already hear from customers on a regular basis "Whats the sales tax here!" they exclaim after I ring up their sale.  I will only hear that more once this passes.  Slow downtown that turns people off, then they get a shock at the register, that doesn't help us sell our city.  Also some of the gain from this tax will be offset as more people are pushed to go online.  We will be closing in on 10% sales tax and could eventually be THE highest sales tax state in the Nation.

I really really do not like how about 20% of this tax will go to higher ed without any proportional allocation to where the money is made.  If we are the second largest city/metro in the state, do you really think we will get the second largest chunk of funding from this to help us finally get a full fledged, publicly funded, graduate university in Tulsa?  Not a chance.  

Nutshell.

More of Tulsa's money will go OUT of Tulsa.

"University" money will go out of Tulsa when we still have unmet University needs here.

Having a full fledged university campus here (and not 10 different mini-half-arsed (if that) campuses) would be a tremendous economic boost (which by the way would increase sales tax revenue)  Thousands of students living next to downtown would help downtown businesses and sales.  Would help increase entrepreneurship.  Having a public university people could "connect" to would increase investments in that university by local philanthropists (just saw how an architecture firm donated a million dollars to OSU, more people/companies would bring those type of dollars and more, hundreds of millions of dollars more I would wager, to Tulsa) Research and government dollars would come to the city,  spin off companies from research could be developed here.  Companies could team up with researchers and other educational components to collaborate on new business enterprises and ideas. Many students would rather be in a more lively, urban environment. A more lively urban environment will help our city become more attractive. Etc. etc. etc.

When we shovel our tax dollars to Stillwater and the numerous small universities out in the boonies, we miss out on all of the above synergies.  This hurts Tulsa, and our entire state! (and its ability to pay teachers more). We are not investing our university tax dollars wisely at all. 

Again, most of the university part of this will not come back to Tulsa, and we will still be left wanting, and our whole state not doing as well as it could be.

This thing is a disaster. Terrible.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 28, 2016, 08:28:09 am

This thing is a disaster. Terrible.




And that is probably the single biggest reason it will pass....  It's what we do to ourselves in this state.  Time and time again.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 28, 2016, 09:22:28 am
I honestly don't think it will even be close. But if it does pass, the state has weathered lots of disasters foisted on us by agenda driven legislators and governors. We're at the bottom now. What's one more?


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: swake on October 28, 2016, 09:56:59 am
I honestly don't think it will even be close. But if it does pass, the state has weathered lots of disasters foisted on us by agenda driven legislators and governors. We're at the bottom now. What's one more?

Sooner Poll has the support for the measure at 60% as of four days ago.  Alcohol Reform is passing too.

http://newsok.com/article/5523735



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 28, 2016, 10:29:22 am
Well, slap my face and call me Betty! 4.26 Margin of error is pretty high. I will still be pretty surprised.

The so called right to farm bill is slipping badly too. That bodes badly for entrenched republican legislators. The population may have figured them out!


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 28, 2016, 12:31:49 pm
Well, slap my face and call me Betty! 4.26 Margin of error is pretty high. I will still be pretty surprised.

The so called right to farm bill is slipping badly too. That bodes badly for entrenched republican legislators. The population may have figured them out!


Naw....we still are that gullible.



Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: Conan71 on October 28, 2016, 02:34:18 pm
Well, slap my face and call me Betty!

Do I really have to call you Betty when I slap your face?


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: AquaMan on October 28, 2016, 06:37:21 pm
In honor of my recently departed mother-in-law whom I adored. Yes. But you may not enjoy it.


Title: Re: SQ 779 / Teacher pay
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on October 29, 2016, 07:23:19 am
Do I really have to call you Betty when I slap your face?


Yes.  You do - it's a law!

Post the video....!!