 A Report from the Bureau of Governmental Research BALLOT JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 INBRIEF What is the tax proposition? Jefferson Parish voters will decide whether to approve a new property tax for increased pay for teachers and other public school system employees. If approved, the tax will be levied parishwide at a rate of 7.9 mills for 10 years, beginning in 2019. The tax is expected to generate $28.8 million in the first year. Why is it on the ballot? The Jefferson Parish School Board views its current pay scales as inadequate to attract and retain high-quality employees to support students’ academic growth. The Jefferson Parish Public School System would use the tax proceeds to implement a new pay plan that has been approved by the School Board, pending passage of the tax proposition. If the tax proposition fails, the current salary schedules will remain in place. BGR’s ON THE BALLOT SERIES This report is the latest in BGR’s On the Ballot series, which provides voters with objective, nonpartisan analysis of significant ballot propositions in the New Orleans metropolitan area. In producing On the Ballot reports, BGR recommends positions consistent with its mission of promoting informed public policy and the effective use of public resources for the improvement of local government. On the Ballot reports bring to light the strengths and weaknesses of ballot propositions and assess the potential for government expenditures or actions to efficiently achieve beneficial outcomes for citizens. REPORTHIGHLIGHTS  If voters approve the tax, a homeowner would pay $79 more annually on each $100,000 of property value above the $75,000 homestead exemption. For example, the owner of a homestead-exempt property valued at the parishwide average home sale price of $224,000 would pay $117.71 more in property taxes per year.  Jefferson Parish has the largest public school system in Louisiana, with more than 51,000 students and an almost $500 million General Fund budget. More than 80% of the School System’s students come from low-income households, 18% have special education needs and 14% have limited English proficiency.  Jefferson’s academic performance has fallen during the last five years. It received a “C” rating from the State in 2018. Its high school graduation rate, 71.8%, ranks 61st out of Louisiana’s 69 school districts.  The School Board projects a $33.3 million total annual cost to implement the new pay plan. It would supplement the $28.8 million in new tax revenue with $4.5 million from current revenues. The School System would direct 73% of new tax revenue to teacher pay raises and incentive stipends. The remaining 27% would fund a portion of support staff pay raises. Current revenue would cover all school and district leader raises and a portion of support staff raises.  The School System has lost more than 1,500 teachers during the last three years. In the 2017-18 school year, it lost 16% of its teachers. It particularly struggles to retain early career teachers. It also struggles to fill teaching positions in certain content areas and in its schools with large concentrations of English language learners and students from low-income households.  The School System’s current entry-level teacher salary, $41,199, is nearly $3,000 (or about 7%) lower than the southeastern Louisiana regional average. Many area districts offer higher entry-level salaries. Charter schools have more discretion in setting individual teacher salaries than traditional school districts. Charters in New Orleans and Jefferson Parish reported average starting teacher salaries that range INBRIEF CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE INBRIEF CONTINUED from significantly below the School System’s current level to significantly above it. Under the new plan, the School System’s entry-level teacher salary would rise to $46,000.  BGR evaluated whether the tax is necessary. The tax would allow the School System to boost teacher salaries to regionally competitive levels and provide stipends to teachers exhibiting high performance or filling high priority needs. The School System’s own experience in attracting and retaining teachers, combined with national research findings and evidence of a statewide teacher shortage, indicate that pay raises and stipends could help reduce teacher turnover and recurring shortages. The tax would also allow the School System to meet its objective of paying all support staff above poverty-level wages. The School System has implemented spending efficiencies, but its current revenue sources are not sufficient to cover the large recurring expenditures that the new pay plan would require.  BGR analyzed whether the tax is appropriately sized. The School System arrived at the proposed 7.9mill rate by calculating how much the new pay plan would cost if implemented in the 2019-20 school year with all current staff in place. Although it is impossible to determine the exact amount of raises required for the School System to achieve sufficient teacher attraction, retention and quality, the proposed plan would strengthen the School System’s competitive position in the job market. It also strategically targets revenue to areas of greatest demonstrated need. At the same time it limits raises for later career teachers whose current salaries are more competitive with those of other area districts. The new support staff salary schedules also distribute revenue strategically to specified objectives.  Finally, BGR reviewed whether the tax revenue would be well spent. If the tax passes, the School Board will use the revenue to implement the pay plan it has already approved. This assures voters that almost three quarters of the new tax revenue would go towards improving teacher attraction, retention and quality. In addition, the School Board recently adopted a five-year strategic plan that commits the School System to rapid growth in student achievement. The strategic plan includes initiatives to improve teacher support that are complementary to the pay increases. The tax revenue therefore stands a greater chance of making a positive impact as part of the School System’s structured effort to transform its professional culture and improve student achievement. Overall, there are multiple indications that the tax revenue would be well spent.  Based on its independent analysis using the framework in this report, BGR finds that the current proposition overcomes the key deficiencies of the School System’s failed 2017 pay raise tax proposition. That proposal sought across-the-board raises without a thorough analysis of staffing needs and compensation disparities. It also did not seek budgeting efficiencies for cost savings or consider other priority needs, such as facilities. The new proposal offers taxpayers a better way to direct new revenue to the School System’s high-priority compensation needs. BGRPOSITION FOR. The Jefferson Parish Public School System has returned to voters with a more well-developed pay raise proposal than the one voters rejected in 2017. Revenue from the proposed tax would allow the School System to boost teacher pay to levels that are competitive with other area districts. More competitive salaries would help the School System overcome high teacher turnover and recurring shortages that negatively impact student achievement and drive up costs. The tax would enable the School System to implement a new pay plan that directs revenue to high-priority needs identified through its analysis of staffing trends. While the School System acknowledges that the support staff raises are not necessary to fill positions, they would eliminate existing compensation inequalities and ensure that all employees earn above poverty line wages. In addition, they would help the School System attract and keep superior employees. Although it has sought budget efficiencies, the size of raises necessary to sufficiently increase competitiveness requires additional revenue. The School Board has maximized the potential impact of higher salaries by adopting a comprehensive strategic plan that commits the School System to significant growth in student achievement by 2024. If voters approve the tax, BGR recommends that the School System regularly review the effectiveness of the pay raises and incentive stipends in attracting and retaining high-quality employees. www.bgr.org • CONNECT WITH BGR • @BGRNola INDEPTH: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 INTRODUCTION If the tax proposition fails, the current salary schedules will remain in place. On May 4, Jefferson Parish voters will decide whether to authorize a new 7.9-mill property tax for their public schools. The proposed 10-year millage would be dedicated to increased pay for teachers and other school system employees. The tax would generate approximately $28.8 million in the first year.1 The proposed pay plan raises the pay of all certified teachers and most support personnel. It slightly increases starting pay for noncertified teachers. Noncertified teachers have at least a bachelor’s degree, but not a teaching credential that is recognized by the State of Louisiana (State). The plan would not cut any current employee’s This report is intended to help voters make an informed pay, although it would reduce the highest potential earndecision on the proposed tax. It begins with an over- ings for some positions. The pay plan would: view of the proposition. It then provides relevant back• Increase the base salary for new certified teachground and an analysis grounded in BGR’s mission of ers by 12%, from $41,199 to $46,000, while at promoting the effective use of public resources. The rethe same time decreasing the annual increase port concludes with BGR’s position on the tax. for each year of work from $600 to $500. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSITION • Raise the annual base pay for teachers by $3,625 on average. The Jefferson Parish School Board (School Board) has proposed levying the new 7.9-mill property tax • Raise annual pay for support staff by an average of parishwide for 10 years, beginning in 2019. The new $2,315 to $2,982, depending on the support area. tax would increase the total millage rate for the Jefferson Parish Public School System (School System) from 22.91 TABLE 1: PROJECTED ANNUAL COSTS OF PROPOSED PAY PLAN mills to 30.81 mills, an increase of 34%. The tax would be subject Projected to the homestead exemption. For Initial Annual Average Cost, Inclusive Portion Funded estimates of the impact on indiAmount or of Related with New Tax vidual taxpayers, see the sidebar Range Expenditures* Revenue “The Taxpayer’s Bottom Line” Pay Raises on page 2. The proposition would dedicate the tax proceeds to “the payment of salaries and benefits of teachers and other school employees.”2 The School Board is seeking the tax because it views its current pay scales as inadequate to attract and retain high-quality employees to support students’ academic growth. Voter approval of the tax would also cause new School System salary schedules to take effect in the 2019-20 school year. Teachers** $3,625 $15,640,000 All Instructional support staff $2,711 $3,997,000 Majority Clerical staff $2,977 $2,025,000 Majority Custodial staff $2,982 $1,706,000 Majority Cafeteria staff $2,315 $1,233,000 Majority Transportation staff $2,859 $1,022,000 Majority School and district leaders $7,078 $1,977,000 None Teacher stipends $1,000-$7,500 $5,400,000 All Principal stipends $2,000 Incentives Total Cost $300,000 None $33,300,000 * Related expenditures include pension contributions, Medicare withholding, unemployment insurance and worker’s compensation insurance. ** Includes certified and noncertified teachers BGR 1 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 • Establish the equivalent of a $15-per-hour wage floor for all employees. In addition, the pay plan would introduce incentives in the form of stipends for teachers and principals. It would also introduce new salary schedules for school and district leaders that would raise pay for the majority of current leaders. As a result of the pay plan, the School System would direct 73% of new millage revenue to teacher pay raises and incentive stipends. The remaining 27% would fund a portion of the support staff pay raises. In all, the School Board projects a $33.3 million total annual cost to implement the entire plan. The School System plans to supplement the $28.8 million in new tax revenue with $4.5 million from current revenues that it will make available through new budgeting efficiencies. The additional money would fund the remaining support staff pay raises and the raises and stipends for school and district leaders. THE TAXPAYER’S BOTTOM LINE In Jefferson Parish, not all millages are levied parishwide, so the total tax rate varies depending on a property’s location. However, the School Board’s new tax would apply parishwide. For example, assuming other millage rates remain the same as in 2018, the new tax would add 7.9 mills to the total rates of 113.40 mills in unincorporated Metairie, 114.25 mills in unincorporated Terrytown, 82.78 mills in the City of Kenner and 97.88 mills in the City of Westwego.* A homeowner would pay $79 more annually on each $100,000 of property value above the $75,000 homestead exemption. For example, the owner of a homestead-exempt property valued at $224,000 would pay $117.71 more per year.** BGR estimates that a commercial property owner would pay $110.60 more annually per $100,000 of property value.*** If voters reject the proposition, the overall property tax rate for the School Board would remain at 22.91 mills. * BGR calculations based on 2018 millage rates compiled by the Jefferson Parish Assessor’s Office. See http://www. jpassessor.com/resources/millages-wards. The School System would not directly pass through ** BGR calculated the homeowner impact using a value any revenue from the proposed tax to Jefferson Parish’s of $224,000 based on data from the New Orleans Metcharter schools. However, passage of the tax would inropolitan Association of Realtors, which show the average sale price for a single family home in Jefferson Parish durcrease the amount of local charter funding. State law reing the 12 months ending December 2018 was $223,648. quires that all charter schools, except those authorized See New Orleans Metropolitan Association of Realtors by the State prior to 2008, receive a pro-rata share of (NOMAR), “Market Statistics,” http://www.nomar.org/ gsrein-mls-public/market-statistics-public.html. school district sales and property tax revenue that is not 3 dedicated to capital outlay or debt service. If the tax *** BGR assumes that land value accounts for 20% of topasses, the School System’s property tax revenue will tal value for commercial properties. increase, thereby increasing Jefferson Parish charter schools’ pro-rata amount of local funding. approval for a new property tax for employee pay raises. In 2017, voters narrowly rejected an 8.45-mill tax BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT to fund across-the-board raises for teachers and other School System employees.4 After the loss, the School This section discusses the origin of the proposed tax. Board began deliberating a second attempt at a pay In addition, it provides an overview of the School Sys- raise millage. tem’s student population, academic performance, finances and employees. In early 2018, the School Board hired a new superintendent (Superintendent), who began analyzing employee Origin of the Proposed Tax compensation. At the same time, the School Board continued to contemplate a possible tax for school facility This is the School Board’s second attempt to win voter improvements. It had engaged an outside consulting 2 BGR ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 group to develop a facilities master plan (Master Plan) for bringing the School System’s aging school facilities up to 21st century standards and aligning facilities with enrollment needs and trends. The School Board planned to use the completed Master Plan to develop a millage proposition for general obligation bonds to fund new facilities construction and upgrades. In October 2018, the School Board accepted the approximately $708 million Master Plan as presented by the consultants. In December 2018, the Superintendent presented his proposed pay plan, and the School Board unanimously approved a resolution putting the current 7.9-mill pay raise proposition on the May 4, 2019 ballot. That same resolution also sought voter approval for the issuance of general obligation bonds to fund the Master Plan, which would require a separate 8.31-mill tax. However, the School Board reconsidered its decision to proceed with both taxpayer requests. In January 2019, Board members voted seven to two to remove the facilities bond millage from the ballot. Board members who supported this decision reiterated the need to implement the Master Plan. However, they believed they needed to gain voters’ trust by demonstrating effective stewardship of the pay raise millage before asking for a second tax. CHART A: JEFFERSON PARISH PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT Asian 5% Black 40% Hispanic 27% White 27% Other 1% Source: Informa on provided by Jefferson Parish Public School System. Includes Jefferson Parish charter schools. ployed about 3,400 teachers (including approximately 300 noncertified teachers) and 3,800 other employees. Academic Performance. Student achievement, as measured by the State’s district performance score has declined in recent years, as shown in Chart B, and remains below the statewide level. The School System scored 70.6 (C letter grade) on a scale from zero to 150 under the more rigorous scoring system introduced in 2018.7 The School System’s high school graduation rate fell from 75.7% in 2015-16 to 71.8% in 2016-17. It is below the statewide rate of 78.2%, and ranks 61st out of The School System Today Jefferson Parish has the largest public school system in Louisiana. It enrolls more than 51,000 students in grades pre-K through 12. About 45,500 students attend the 80 schools directly operated by the School System, while charter schools enroll about 5,800, or 11%, of Jefferson Parish students.5 As shown in Chart 1, Jefferson Parish’s public school population is diverse, with black, Hispanic and white enrollment each accounting for more than 25% of total enrollment. In addition, 82% of students come from low-income households, 18% have special education needs and 14% have limited English proficiency.6 The School System has a General Fund budget of nearly $500 million. In the 2017-18 school year, it em- CHART B. JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE SCORE VS. STATE, 2014-2018 89.2 88.8 87.2 87.7 86.8 83.0 79.4 78.9 76.1 70.6 2014 2015 2016 Jefferson Parish 2017 2018 Statewide Source: Louisiana Department of Education BGR 3 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 Louisiana’s 69 school districts.8 Chart C illustrates the decline compared to the statewide average. Financial Picture. The School System anticipates $477.4 million in General Fund revenue in fiscal year 2019, with local sales and property taxes accounting for slightly more than half of the total. As Chart D shows, State sources, most importantly Minimum Foundation Program (MFP) funding, comprise almost the entire balance. The School System separately accounts for almost $75 million annually in federal grant funding. The School System’s 2019 General Fund expenditure budget totals $476.6 million. Salaries account for 50% of expenditures, while benefits are another 27%. In addition to personnel and other expenses, the School System must pass through State and local MFP funding to charter schools. This funding is based on their enrollment counts and student characteristics. Charter pass-through funding accounts for $29 million, or 6%, of 2019 budgeted expenditures. CHART C: HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES, JEFFERSON VS. STATE, 2014-2018 77.5% 74.6% 73.5% 71.9% Louisiana law enables school districts to include performance and critical needs as factors in teacher pay. Act 1 of the 2012 legislative session requires school systems to base salaries for teachers, administrators and other certified school personnel on three criteria. No single criterion may account for more than 50% of total salary: 4 BGR 78.1% 75.7% 73.3% 71.8% 69.4% 2013 2014 2015 Jefferson Parish 2016 2017 Statewide Source: Louisiana Department of Education, District and State Graduation Rates CHART D: SCHOOL SYSTEM GENERAL FUND REVENUE AT A GLANCE In addition to the General Fund budget, the School System directs local tax revenue to debt service and capital expenditures. As shown in Table 2, these expenditures consumed about 10% of fiscal year 2018 property and sales tax revenue. Employees. Like most other U.S. school systems, Jefferson Parish uses a salary schedule based on years of experience (steps) and education level (lanes).9 Jefferson Parish is one of only a few school districts in Louisiana that has a collective bargaining agreement with its employees.10 The Jefferson Federation of Teachers (Teachers’ Union) participates in negotiations with the Superintendent on the salary schedules for teachers and other School System employees. The School Board must approve all salary schedules. 77.0% State 47% Property Taxes 16% Sales Taxes 36% Other Local 0.5% Source: Jefferson Parish Public School System 2018-19 Budget TABLE 2: TOTAL SCHOOL SYSTEM TAX REVENUE General Fund Debt Service and Capital Projects Total Property tax $76.3 $10.6 $87.0 Sales tax $177.7 $17.0 $194.7 Total $254.1 $27.6 $281.7 Source: Jefferson Parish Public School System Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2018 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 • Effectiveness, as determined by the State’s performance evaluation program. • Demand, including certification area, particular school need, geographic area and subject area, including advanced degrees. • Experience.11 “ School System officials say the proposed tax is necessary to make Jefferson Parish teacher pay more competitive with teacher compensation in other area school districts. They reason that more competitive pay will help them attract and retain the quality teachers needed to improve student achievement. To comply with Act 1, the School System implemented a salary schedule for teachers and principals that tied step increases for experience to annual achievement of a State rating above “ineffective” and continued its lane increases for advanced degrees.12 tax, but authorizes school districts to seek additional taxes for a specific purpose.14 For noncertified personnel, the salary schedule is based solely on experience. For example, School System sup- Tax dedications restrict revenue to the uses authorized port staff receive pay increases for each additional year in the ballot proposition approved by voters, even if of employment. the tax recipient’s needs change over time. Dedicated tax revenue cannot be redirected to other purposes, no In the past 15 years, both School System teachers and matter how great the need, unless voters approve a tax support staff have received pay raises. The School Board rededication. sought voter approval for the largest one, a 9-mill tax for teacher pay raises approved in 2003 and renewed in For this reason, a school system proposing a dedicated 2012. Teachers and school-based support staff received tax bears a burden of proof to voters that (1) there is $250 raises in 2018.13 The School System’s current a clear, high priority need for additional revenue, (2) contract with the Teachers’ Union, adopted in 2015 and it sought efficiencies in current spending, and (3) the extended through 2021 did not increase teachers’ salary proposed tax is the best way to meet the need. schedule. It also does not require the School Board to consider a pay increase. Because of the complexity of the proposed pay plan, BGR will separately analyze the School System’s revANALYSIS enue needs and compensation plans for teachers and support staff. The section will then discuss the efficienIn this section, BGR analyzes the tax proposition on the cies and funding alternatives to the proposed tax for the basis of three questions related to efficient and effective School System as a whole. use of public resources: Is the tax necessary? Is it appropriately sized to the need? And, will the tax revenue Assessing the Need for Increased Teacher Compensabe well spent? tion. School System officials say the proposed tax is necessary to make Jefferson Parish teacher pay more Is the Tax Necessary? competitive with teacher compensation in other area school districts. They reason that more competitive pay Public school systems provide a core public service will help them attract and retain the quality teachers and, in Louisiana, have separate funding from other lo- needed to improve student achievement. cal governments. The Louisiana Constitution limits the millage rate for each district’s general purpose property The School System has struggled with teacher attraction “ BGR 5 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 and retention. As Chart E shows, during the past three school years, it lost 1,555 teachers. In the 2017-18 school year, it lost 16% of its teachers. During the 2015-16 school year, Louisiana as a whole lost 13% of its public school teachers and southeast Louisiana lost 16%.15 Despite a robust summer recruitment campaign, it still started the 2018-19 school year with 39 vacancies. School System officials report that 24% of classes are currently taught by noncertified teachers or teachers not certified in the class’ specific content area. This compares to 14% for southeast Louisiana public schools in the 2016-17 school year.16 CHART E: TEACHERS LOST DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS Source: Jefferson Parish Public School System. Includes certified and noncertified teachers. One of the major areas of retention problems is with early career teachers. In the 2016-17 school year, the School System retained only 64% of teachers with a year or less experience, and only 71% of teachers with two to five years of experience. As Chart F shows, the more years of experience teachers have, the more likely they are to stay with the School System, until they near retirement. in Jefferson Parish and then leave for higher-paying school districts after gaining a few years of experience, and, if noncertified, earning their teacher certification. In addition, recruiters report losing numerous candidates to higher-paying districts. The average School System teacher salary is $49,590. This salary is $298 below the southeast Louisiana regional average, but School System officials and parish educators note that $1,149 above the statewide average.17 However, the it is common for new teachers to begin their careers School System’s starting salary for certified teachers, at $41,199, is about 7% below the regional average of $44,168 and 5% below the state CHART F: TEACHER RETENTION BY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE average of $43,345.18 Because the regional and state averages include uncertified teachers, it is likely that the averages for 86% certified teachers are higher. 79% 80% 80% 71% 64% <=1 YEAR 2 TO 5 YEARS 6 TO 10 YEARS 11 TO 15 YEARS 16 TO 20 YEARS >=21 YEARS Source: Jefferson Parish Public School System. Data from 2016-17 school year. Includes certified and noncertified teachers. 6 BGR The teacher salary schedule that the School System would implement if the tax passes would boost entry level certified teacher pay above most area districts. It would also ensure that salaries remain competitive throughout a teacher’s career. The report’s section analyzing the appropriateness of the size of the tax will discuss raise amounts in greater detail. In addition to base pay raises, the proposed ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 during their peak growth period, and often replacing them with less experienced and less effective teachers. The new salary schedule aims to break this cycle by providing early career teachers a greater financial incentive to stay with the School System and continue to The School System’s need for improved teacher at- increase their effectiveness. traction and retention is evidenced by its loss of more than 1,500 teachers during the last three years, its in- Pay raises will only be effective if they have a substanability to hire enough teachers for every classroom and tial impact on teacher attraction, retention and quality. its elevated percentage of classes taught by uncertified The Superintendent maintains that while pay may be and out-of-content area teachers. Research shows that the most important factor in teacher recruitment, raises poor teacher retention has negative consequences for alone won’t drive retention. To address retention holisschools. The cost of replacing a teacher who leaves an tically, the School System is also working to improve urban school district exceeds $20,000 on average, and school-level leadership and workplace culture. high turnover rates reduce student achievement.19 The School System is not the only district experiencThe School System’s falling academic performance also ing difficulty finding enough qualified teachers. State points to its need to improve teacher quality, one of the education officials acknowledge that Louisiana is exmost important drivers of student achievement. The Su- periencing a teacher shortage, which is contributing to perintendent designed the new teacher salary schedule staffing issues for many districts. Completion of teacher and stipends to boost student achievement by reducing certification programs fell statewide from 2,802 in the teacher turnover and attracting more highly effective 2010-11 school year to 2,166 in 2015-16, a 23% drop.21 teachers. Teacher effectiveness tends to increase most Theoretically, if the supply of teachers contracts, disrapidly during the first few years of a teacher’s career.20 tricts must increase salaries in order to hire the number Currently, the School System is losing many teachers of teachers they need. pay plan also includes stipends that provide teachers additional pay for demonstrating effectiveness, helping fill critical shortages, or performing additional roles and responsibilities. Table 3 outlines each stipend. TABLE 3: PROPOSED TEACHER STIPENDS Eligibility Amount Performance • Receive State rating of “Highly Effective” • Eligible every year rated “Highly Effective” Content Area • Certified teacher in content area with more open positions than qualified applicants (currently high school math and science, special education and English as a second language) • Eligible as long as teaching in critical area $1,000 Target School • Teach at a school with enrollment that is at least 90% low-income or 30% English language learner. • First year at target school only (stipend paid at end of school year)** $2,000 Teacher Leader • Selected and perform additional defined responsibilities • Eligible as long as performing defined responsibilities $1,000 Master Teacher • Selected and perform additional defined responsibilities • Eligible as long as performing defined responsibilities $7,500 $1,000 - $2,000* * The pay plan provides teachers rated highly effective under the State’s teacher rating system with a stipend of $2,000 if they teach classes subject to statewide testing, or $1,000 if they teach classes such as physical education, music and art, which are not subject to statewide testing. ** Principals at the 25 target schools would receive about $25,000 to $30,000 to offer additional stipends to current teachers participating in after school tutoring and other supplementary programs. BGR 7 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 • • • Positive effects of salary on duration of teaching stay Lower likelihood of movement to another school district when the current district salary is higher than those of other area districts Lower likelihood of leaving the teaching profession if in a district with a higher salary relative to salaries for college graduates in other employment sectors in the region. Large salary premiums may be necessary to overcome higher teacher turnover rates at urban schools.22 “ Master teachers would share instructional leadership with principals, and be required to work a minimum of 10 additional contract days per year. Teacher leader responsibilities would include professional development planning and delivery and supporting teacher teams. “ On an empirical level, research has found that salaries affect teachers’ employment decisions. These findings include: on program design and implementation context.25 An evaluation of a large federally-funded performance pay • program found evidence that stipends led to higher performance ratings among teachers who stayed at their schools. This indicates that stipends helped schools reAnalyzing data from a national survey, researchers tain their more effective teachers or motivated teachers 26 found that 13% of teachers who voluntarily left the pro- to improve. fession (leavers) included wanting or needing a higher salary as a factor in their decision. Among teachers who Recent research has found positive effects of some voluntarily moved to another school (movers), 27% in- financial incentive programs on teacher retention at 27 cluded financial reasons as a top factor in their deci- challenging schools and in critical content areas. In sion.23 Pay was not the only motivating factor, however. some cases, reduction in teacher turnover only occurred where schools offered larger maximum incentives.28 The researchers found that both leavers and movers This suggests that the School System’s proposed concommonly named non-financial reasons as important in tent area and target school stipends could help it meet their decisions. Among leavers, 55% cited “dissatisfac- its teacher needs in these particular areas. tion” as being a very important reason for exiting the teaching profession. Many of them named assessments The master teacher and teacher leader positions includand accountability measures and school administration ed in the new pay plan offer the School System another as particular areas of dissatisfaction. Also, 66% of mov- means to retain its best teachers. These positions fill a ers cited dissatisfaction as a key reason for changing gap in the existing staffing model. They also leverage schools. They most commonly listed dissatisfaction with resources by expanding the potential impact of the most school administration, lack of influence on school deci- effective teachers on their schools. Master teachers sion making and school conditions such as resources and would share instructional leadership with principals, facilities. Research has also found that, after controlling and be required to work a minimum of 10 additional for other factors, teachers’ likelihood of leaving is higher contract days per year. Teacher leader responsibilities would include professional development planning and in schools with academically struggling students.24 delivery and supporting teacher teams. The SuperintenExisting research presents a mixed review of the ef- dent designed the new teacher leadership positions in fectiveness of teacher incentive stipends. Some studies accordance with the National Institute for Excellence in have found evidence that performance pay programs Teaching’s (NIET) model for providing teachers mulhave modest positive effects on student test scores. tiple career paths. This model has been implemented in The magnitude of the effect varies greatly depending schools across the nation for two decades. 8 BGR ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 In summary, the School System’s own experience in attracting and retaining teachers, combined with national research findings and evidence of a statewide teacher shortage, indicate that pay raises and stipends could help reduce teacher turnover and the number of unfilled positions. Teachers, like most workers, consider salary in their employment decisions. The School System’s entry-level teacher salary currently lags behind the southeast Louisiana regional average. Neighboring school systems with higher performing students and less challenging classrooms offer higher pay and provide an attractive teaching alternative. While most of the stipends may be modest in amount, teachers may receive multiple stipends. This could help offset the opportunity costs presented by higher wages in other employment sectors. In addition, the potential to earn several thousand dollars in stipend pay may help the School System attract the high performing teachers it needs to meet its student achievement goals. The proposed pay plan would bring all support staff salaries up to the equivalent of at least $15 per hour and fix the inconsistencies between salaries of staff members performing the same duties. Starting salaries for positions that are “underpaid” under the current salary schedule inconsistencies would see larger increases under the proposed plan. The School System did not analyze support staff compensation vis-à-vis that of other area districts because it does not see competition with other districts as the issue with support staff pay. Rather, School System officials maintain that the current salaries of support staff do not reflect the value of these employees to the system’s effort to deliver quality education. The current pay plan sets wages for some support staff below the poverty level. In addition, the Superintendent notes the higher selectivity required when hiring employees who will be working with or around children. All support staff must pass background checks and drug screenings, and the Assessing the Need for Increased Support Staff Com- low current salaries make it difficult to attract and repensation. The proposed pay plan would introduce new tain qualified employees. salary schedules for all School System support staff, including instructional support (paraprofessionals), caf- The main intent of the new support staff salary schedeteria, custodial, clerical and transportation staff. The ules is not to help the School System ameliorate recurSuperintendent found that current salaries for many ring staffing deficiencies or improve student achievesupport staff positions fall below the poverty level.29 ment, but to ensure that all staff receive above poverty He also found that their salary schedules were often in- level wages and fair pay for their work to support stuconsistent, with employees in the same position earning dent learning. By design, the new pay plan would acvery different hourly wages depending on the number complish those aims. of hours worked. For example, as Table 4 shows, a cafeteria employee working four hours per day earned a The proposed pay plan also includes new salaries for salary equivalent to $14.95 per hour, while a cafeteria school and district leaders that would increase annual employee working seven hours per day earned a salary personnel expenditures by about $2.3 million. The new equivalent to $12.51 per hour – a difference of $2.44 leader salaries account for about 7% of the total $33.3 million pay plan’s costs. However, the School System per hour. would not use any revenue from the proposed tax to TABLE 4: HOURLY WAGES FOR CAFETERIA WORKERS Current Pay Plan New Pay Plan 4-Hour Cafeteria Worker 7-Hour Cafeteria Worker 4-Hour Cafeteria Worker 7-Hour Cafeteria Worker Starting salary $14.95 $12.51 $15.08 $15.08 Ending Salary $15.69 $13.26 $16.67 $16.67 BGR 9 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 fund the new leader salaries, and it will not implement the changes unless the new tax passes. A discussion of the proposed leader salaries and stipends is presented in the sidebar “Proposed Leader Compensation.” Consideration of Efficiencies. The School System has used existing funding sources twice in the last two school years to provide relatively modest pay raises or stipends. At the end of the 2017-18 school year, it used more than $10 million from the unrestricted portion of its General Fund balance to pay school-based staff one-time stipends ranging from $500 to $2,000. In the 2018-19 school year, the Superintendent eliminated 10 central office positions. This freed up enough revenue to offset about half of the projected $2.3 million required to provide $250 raises for teachers and schoolbased support staff. The School System also hired a national educational consultant in 2018 to examine its federal grants budgets and identify areas for more effective and efficient expenditures. The pay plan that will go into effect if the millage passes requires $4.5 million in funding beyond the proceeds from the proposed tax. The Superintendent is in the process of analyzing the academic return of several existing programs, and is optimistic that he can find sufficient internal funding by eliminating or streamlining the least effective programs. Employee benefits account for more than one quarter of General Fund expenditures, and they are a cost over which the School System has limited control. Historic underfunding of the State’s pension systems for teachers and school employees have created large required employer contributions.30 However, State law requires the School System to participate in the pension systems, and it determines contribution rates. As costly as the School System’s retirement spending is, it must pay the required contribution rate. Overall, the school system cannot free up enough revenue through efficiencies alone. Even a smaller pay raise plan than the one proposed would require substantial 10 BGR PROPOSED LEADER COMPENSATION The Superintendent’s analysis of leadership compensation found that under the current system, there were often wide discrepancies between the salaries of district leaders holding the same positions and performing the same responsibilities.* The current pay plan allows the superintendent broad discretion in determining the salaries for district leaders. Currently, the superintendent may assign any salary from within the plan’s stated range for each position. The proposed pay plan changes compensation for district leaders by tying salaries for these positions to teacher salaries. The plan calculates each leader’s salary as a ratio of teacher salary. For example, a social studies coordinator, with a master’s degree and 10 years’ experience would receive a salary 1.2 times that of a teacher with a master’s degree and 10 years’ experience. For principals and assistant principals, the School System’s current pay plan uses a salary schedule similar in structure to the one used for teachers. It increases their salary for each additional year of work and for higher education levels. The new pay plan would tie principal and assistant principal salaries to a ratio of teacher salaries. For example, an elementary school principal, with a master’s degree and 15 years’ experience would receive a salary 1.55 times that of a teacher with a master’s degree and 15 years’ experience. The Superintendent designed the ratio system in the proposed plan to eliminate the inequalities allowed under the current system. He determined the ratios by looking at current average pay across the same positions, as well as considering salaries for similar positions in other area school districts. The new pay plan also includes $2,000 stipends for principals receiving a “highly effective” State rating and $2,000 stipends for 10 principal leaders who will perform additional responsibilities related to training and mentoring prospective principals. The Superintendent included the principal performance stipends in the new pay plan as part of his effort to attract and retain the best leaders. He told BGR that principal leaders, a designation that does not exist in the School System’s current staffing model, will play a critical role in developing future school leaders in-house. * District leaders include coordinators, directors, executive directors, and chiefs. The new pay plan does not include the superintendent’s salary, which is directly negotiated by the School Board. ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 cuts to the School System’s current non-personnel expenditures. For example, a $20 million pay raise plan would require cutting other expenditures by almost 25%. Because more than three quarters of the School System’s budget is personnel cost, other operational expenditures would require severe cuts. This could create problems for facilities, transportation, curriculum and other school supports. Alternative Funding Options. The School System’s General Fund budget has limited capacity to fund additional raises. It cannot absorb the full cost contemplated in the proposed pay plan. CHART G: JEFFERSON PARISH PER-PUPIL GENERAL FUND REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES, 10-YEAR TREND $11,000 $10,000 $9,000 $8,000 $7,000 $6,000 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 General Fund Revenue General Fund Expenditures Source: BGR calculations based on General Fund revenue and expenditure As shown in Chart G, since 2013, the School reported in School System Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for fiscal years 2009 to 2018 and Jefferson Parish October 1 Minimum Foundation System’s General Fund revenue per pupil has Enrollment for 2008 to 2017. generally exceeded expenditures per pupil, although expenditures surpassed revenue in fiscal year 2018. During the last 10 years revenue per tax now cost more than the tax annually generates. The pupil has remained flat (1.3% average annual growth) School System uses the restricted portion of the fund and average annual growth in expenditures per pupil balance to make up the difference. Once it has conhas been minimal (0.7%). Enrollment growth has offset sumed the restricted fund balance, the School System any revenue growth. Adjusted for inflation, revenue per must use other revenue sources to fully cover the costs pupil in 2018 was $432 less than in 2009, and expendi- of the 2005 raises. The remainder of the General Fund balance, $3.3 million, consists of prepaid expenses. ture per pupil was $1,103 less. The recent General Fund surpluses, along with a large one-time post-Katrina payment from the federal government and the proceeds of the 2016 BP settlement have allowed the School System to build a General Fund balance of about $157 million. This is shown in Chart H on the next page. However, only about $82 million, the equivalent of 17% of General Fund expenditures, is unassigned. The School Board has committed by policy another $42.5 million to be used only if a supermajority of the School Board declares an emergency. It has assigned $17 million, most of which came from the BP settlement, to investment and finalized but unpaid purchases. Although the $82 million unassigned fund balance could cover the costs of the proposed pay raises for a few years, it would not be sufficient to fund these expenditures on a recurring basis. Furthermore, best practices advise that fund balances should not be used for recurring expenditures.32 The School System could direct the approximately $2.3 million in current revenue earmarked for new school and district leader salaries to teacher and support staff raises. However, this would not come close to covering the costs of the raises included in the proposed plan. Louisiana’s Governor has announced plans to seek About $11.7 million of the general fund balance is re- State-funded teacher and support staff pay raises. He stricted, and can only be used for teacher pay raises.31 has proposed $1,000 raises for teachers and $500 raises However, the pay raises implemented in 2005 following for support staff. However, if approved by the Legislavoter approval of the existing 9-mill teacher pay raise ture, these raises would be applied to teacher salaries BGR 11 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 CHART H: JEFFERSON PARISH PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM, GENERAL FUND BALANCE, 2005 TO 2018 $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 $80 $60 $40 $20 $0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 The School System’s general fund balance swelled from $48.0 million in 2005 to $144.8 million in 2006, largely the result of an influx of onetime federal dollars for post-disaster assistance. Source: Jefferson Parish Public School System Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for fiscal years 2005 to 2018 across the State. Thus while increasing Jefferson Parish teacher salaries, the raises would not improve the School System’s competitive position amongst other districts. It would still require revenue from a new source to boost teacher pay above other area districts. may positively impact teacher retention. Although the School System has implemented spending efficiencies, its current revenue sources are not sufficient to cover the large recurring expenditures that the proposed pay raises would require. However, if the Legislature approves the Governor’s proposed $500 raise for school support staff, the School System may not need the full $10 million it budgeted for implementing this portion of the new pay plan. Unlike the teacher raises, School System officials are not proposing the support staff raises as a means to improve competitiveness vis-à-vis other area districts. The State funded raises could offset the amount of revenue the School System needs to meet the total cost of the support staff salaries specified in the new plan. It is uncertain if the Legislature will approve the State funded raises. Is the Tax Appropriately Sized to the Need? The School System needs to attract and retain more quality teachers in order to improve falling student achievement. Each year, it loses teachers and candidates to higher paying area districts. Research finds that higher salaries and targeted financial incentives One of the Superintendent’s criteria in developing the proposed pay raise tax was to keep the rate below the 8.45-mill rate of the pay raise tax proposition voters rejected in 2017. The Superintendent established the 7.9-mill rate for the proposed tax by calculating how 12 BGR The size of any dedicated tax should be aligned with the identified needs. A misalignment between a tax’s size and the recipient’s revenue needs can lead to inefficiencies. If the tax is too low, it might not generate sufficient revenue to provide necessary public goods or services. If the tax is too high, the entity may receive more revenue than its needs to fulfill the tax’s dedicated purpose. However, it will not be able to redirect the surplus revenue to other unfunded needs, should they exist. ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 CHART I: STARTING TEACHER SALARIES* Average range in Orleans and Jefferson $46,300 charter schools: $33,295 to $54,738 $46,000 $44,565 $44,500 $44,300 $44,168 $43,683 $43,345 $42,317 $41,199 * The Orleans Parish School Board is not included because it directly runs only three schools and plans not to directly run any schools beginning in the 2019-20 school year. District starting salaries are for certified teachers with a bachelor’s degree, as reported in the district salary schedules used during 2018-19 school year. District salary schedules apply only to certified teachers, except in Ascension Parish. Regional and statewide averages are from the Louisiana Department of Education’s 2016-17 Educator Workforce Report, Southeast Region. Regional and statewide averages include charter schools and noncertified teachers. Charter school salary data is from the Louisiana Department of Education’s 2017-2018 Actual Average Salaries by Education Level and Years of Experience, and includes first-year certified and noncertified teachers with a bachelor’s degree. BGR considered averages below $30,000 or above 60,000 outliers and did not include them in the analysis. much the new pay plan would cost if implemented in the 2019-20 school year with the current School System staff in place. The millage rate is based on actual staffing numbers and the experience and education levels of current employees. The Superintendent projected the number of teachers who would receive performance stipends. Thus, the proposed tax should cover the costs of the new pay plan, without generating surplus revenue. However, the cost of the pay plan will likely vary slightly from year to year, as the overall experience level and size of the staff is not constant. The Superintendent also notes that if all elements of the new pay plan work as intended, teacher attraction and retention should improve. This could increase the number of teachers rated highly effective, and, in turn, the total cost of performance stipends. While it is impossible to determine the exact amount of pay raises required for the School System to meet its staffing needs, there is some evidence that making teacher pay competitive with the area’s highest paying districts could improve retention. The amount of the proposed raises would accomplish this. Chart I shows that Jefferson’s current certified teacher starting teacher salary is lower than those of six other area districts, but it would rise to number two if the proposed pay raise millage passed. Charter schools have more discretion in setting individual teacher salaries than traditional school districts. They may not follow rigid salary schedules based largely on experience and education level like those used by districts. Charters in New Orleans and Jefferson Parish reported average starting teacher salaries that range from significantly below the School System’s current level to significantly above it. BGR 13 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 CHART J: CERTIFIED TEACHER BASE SALARIES Although all School System certified teachers would see a $60,000 pay increase under the new sal$58,000 ary schedule, the raises would $56,000 $54,000 be larger for early career teach$52,000 ers. The starting salary for a $50,000 certified teacher would increase $48,000 by $4,801, from $41,199 to $46,000 $46,000. However, because $44,000 the schedule also reduces the $42,000 step increase for each addition$40,000 al year worked from $600 to Entry 5th Year 10th Year 15th Year 20th Year 25th Year 30th Year Level $500, the raise amount decreases with years of experience. Current Proposed For example, the raise amount Under the current schedule, salary reaches its maximum in year 27 ($56,799). Under the proposed for a fifth-year teacher would schedule, salary reaches its maximum in year 26 ($59,000). be $4,401, and for a tenth-year teacher it would be $3,901. As Chart J shows, the new salary schedule gives a substan- search has found that context, design, implementation tial boost to the starting salary in an effort to increase and stipend amount all play a role in the effectiveness early career teacher retention, while decreasing the of teacher stipend programs. As previously discussed, rate of salary growth. First-year, noncertified teachers teachers may qualify for multiple stipends, which could would see a slight pay increase, but would have their help attract and retain teachers with skills that would salaries frozen at that level until gaining certification.33 allow them to earn higher salaries in non-teaching sectors. As Chart K shows, under the proposed plan, Jefferson Parish teacher salaries would stay competitive with Nationally, teachers unions do not support performance those of other area districts throughout the course of a pay. Their preferences may limit district funding for teaching career. performance-based stipends. Locally, the Teachers’ Union supports the new pay plan, but would like to see The School System’s teacher performance stipend the stipends for highly effective performance extended amounts, at $1,000 to $2,000, are higher than most to teachers receiving the second highest effectiveness other area districts’ performance-based awards. Ascen- rating as well. sion, East Baton Rouge, Plaquemines and St. Tammany school districts offer teachers receiving a highly effec- As with the proposed teacher salary schedule, the suptive State rating awards, ranging from $500 to $1,200.34 port staff salary schedules would provide the biggest The School System’s $1,000 content area stipends are boost to starting pay while decreasing the amount lower than East Baton Rouge’s $3,500 stipends for mid- added to salary for each additional year worked. Posidle and high school math and science teachers and St. tions that were “overpaid” as compared to other posiJohn’s $5,000 stipends for special education teachers. tions performing the same duties would receive much Its $2,000 target school stipends are also slightly lower smaller raises under the new plan. In targeting revenue than St. John’s $2,500 stipends for teaching in the dis- to historically underfunded positions, as opposed to oftrict’s lowest performing schools.35 However, it is not fering one-sized across the board raises, the plan helps possible to determine in advance the amount required limit overall costs. Based on current employment levto meet the individual objectives of the stipends. Re- els, the School System projects total costs of support 14 BGR ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 CHART K: PROPOSED JEFFERSON TEACHER SALARIES COMPARED TO CERTIFIED TEACHER BASE SALARIES IN SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA SCHOOL DISTRICTS $65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000 pay and eliminating existing inequalities. Overall, the proposed tax appears appropriately sized for implementation of the new pay plan and achievement of its immediate compensation objectives. Will the Tax Revenue be Well Spent? $45,000 $40,000 Entry Level 5th Year 10th Year 15th Year 20th Year 25th Year 30th Year Like other tax dedications, school tax dedications can limit the discretion of elected school Ascension East Baton Rouge Livingston board members to redeploy tax Plaquemines St. Charles St. Tammany revenues to address new circumJefferson stances. This can lead to allocath tions of tax revenues that are not Salary reaches its maximum in the 26 year in Jefferson, St. Charles and Plaquemines. aligned with a school system’s most pressing needs. Tax dedicastaff pay raises of just under $10 million, inclusive of tions may also reduce taxpayers’ tolerance for future retirement, benefits and other required expenditures. If millage requests despite the merits of the proposithe proposed pay raise millage passes, the School Sys- tion. To minimize these risks, a dedicated tax proposal tem plans on funding about $7.8 million of the support should offer voters: staff raises with millage revenue, and using existing • A clear plan for directing tax proceeds to highrevenue sources to cover the $2.2 million balance. priority needs • Appropriate financial stewardship of and accountThe proposed tax would meet the School System’s ability for taxpayer dollars revenue needs for implementing the new support staff • Evidence that demonstrates the potential for efsalary schedules. However, as mentioned earlier, if the fective outcomes Legislature passes the Governor’s proposed $500 raise for school support staff, the School System’s cost of implementing the new salary schedules would be offset Planning for High-Priority Needs. The Superintendent by State funding. If this happens, it is likely that the designed the proposed tax to fulfill the revenue needs of the new pay plan. The School Board has approved the proposed tax would produce surplus revenue. new pay plan, provided the millage passes. The proposed plan addresses the School System’s competitiveness issue and strategically targets revenue to The specifics of this proposed pay raise millage were areas of greatest demonstrated need, while at the same largely driven by the Superintendent and his findings. time limiting raises for later career teachers whose sala- He told BGR that an internal working group spent ries are already more competitive with those of other months analyzing current employee compensation and area districts. The new support staff salary schedules employment trends, compensation in other school disare also strategic in distributing revenue to meet speci- tricts and recommended best practices. He also consultfied objectives. They would allow all employees to ed with numerous stakeholders both inside and outside earn at least $15 per hour, while reining in experience the School System. The new pay plan is specifically tarBGR 15 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 geted toward improving teacher attraction and retention The School Board adopted a five-year strategic plan in the areas where the School System has experienced (Strategic Plan) in February 2019, which lays out a path for growing from a “C” rating to an “A” rating its greatest struggles. by 2024. The Strategic Plan’s transparent goal suggests The School Board decided not to seek voters’ approval the School Board’s increased commitment to public accountability. In adopting the Strategic Plan, the for facilities funding until it has demonstrated that its School Board recognizes its core responsibilstewardship of local resources is contributing ity to provide high quality education to all to improved student achievement. The maThe School Jefferson Parish students. jority of members believe that while upSystem’s fund graded facilities also play a role in boostbalance policies have Finally, the School System’s fund baling student performance, the impacts allowed it to achieve ance policies and recent usage are in of improved attraction and retention of Standard & Poor’s AA accordance with best practices.37 At quality teachers will be most significant bond rating. $82 million, its unassigned fund balance and therefore are the highest priority. One would cover two months of General Fund School Board member who voted against expenditures. In addition, board policy comremoving proposition for facilities funding mits $42.5 million to emergency, non-recurring from the ballot preferred to address both pay and facilities at the same time. He noted that voters in his expenditures. The School System’s fund balance policies have allowed it to achieve Standard & Poor’s AA district want new and upgraded school facilities. bond rating.38 Financial Stewardship and Accountability. The School Board has repeatedly stressed its commitment to regain- If the millage passes, it will be important for the School ing voters’ trust. School Board members have noted that System to review the impact of the new pay plan. The the body’s political infighting during the past few years Superintendent says that the ultimate success of the has alienated voters. In addition, the School Board has pay plan should be evaluated against progress towards expended taxpayer dollars on legal settlements stem- meeting the student achievement objectives laid out in ming from board member actions.36 From a financial the Strategic Plan. Because competitive pay is only one standpoint, the School System has received clean au- of many strategies the Strategic Plan employs to meet dits during the last 10 years, and has met the State’s re- these objectives, the Superintendent will also monitor quirement for spending at least 70% of State and local more immediate outcomes, such as recruitment numrevenue on instruction at the school level since 2013. bers and retention rates. However, the School System’s academic performance has fallen for three consecutive years. Potential for Effective Outcomes. Research shows teacher effectiveness to be one of the most important The Superintendent, although only on the job for a year, drivers of student achievement.39 It finds that teacher already has demonstrated a commitment to efficient turnover is not only costly for school systems, but has spending. Upon entry, he evaluated central office staff- negative effects on student achievement. The School ing and eliminated 10 positions. He has engaged the System has the least success in keeping early career expertise of a national K-12 education consultant to ex- teachers, and often must replace them with even less amine the School System’s federal grant spending and experienced teachers. Studies find that teacher effecidentify areas for improving effectiveness. He is also in tiveness grows most rapidly in the first few years in the the process of reviewing the academic returns on vari- classroom. Thus the pay plan’s emphasis on improving ous programs the School System uses, with the objec- teacher retention and quality suggests it could increase tive of streamlining or eliminating those not delivering student achievement. sufficient results. 16 BGR ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 “ If the tax passes, the School Board will use the revenue to implement the pay plan it has already approved. This ensures that almost three quarters of the new tax revenue would go towards improving teacher attraction, retention and quality. “ In implementing the pay plan as part of its comprehensive Strategic Plan to substantially improve academic performance, the School System increases the likelihood the proposed tax will achieve the desired results. The Strategic Plan encapsulates components of the new pay plan in its second and third priorities. Teacher compensation factors into Priority 2: “hiring, growing and keeping the best teachers.” Leader compensation factors into Priority 3: “hiring, growing and keeping the best leaders.”40 Another reform the School System is implementing as part of its effort to increase student achievement is the expansion of its pre-kindergarten through 8th grade school model. On average, 6th through 8th grade students in these schools score 25 points higher on standardized tests than their peers attending middle schools (schools serving only grades six through eight). In addition, the School System lost 550 students in the transition between 5th and 6th grade in 2018.42 School System officials believe that limiting school transitions will increase student retention. In March 2019, the School • Supporting new teachers and principals • Expanding and improving professional develop- Board approved the school closures and reconfigurations that will facilitate expansion of the pre-kindergarment • Building teacher and principal mentorship oppor- ten to eighth model. The approved changes align with the adopted Master Plan. tunities In addition to offering competitive pay to secure the best teachers and leaders, the Strategic Plan calls for the introduction of many nonpecuniary measures to reduce teacher turnover and grow the skills of the School System’s teachers and leaders. The Strategic Plan acknowledges the evidence that pay raises alone will not solve teacher shortages and turnover struggles. Although critically important, they are not sufficient on their own. It includes strategies for: • Implementing a year-long residency program that Overall, there are multiple indications that the tax revcertifies teachers in-house enue would be well spent. If the tax passes, the School The School System would implement the performance Board will use the revenue to implement the pay plan stipends as part of its adoption of a National Institute it has already approved. This ensures that almost three quarters of the new tax revenue would go towards imfor Excellence in Teaching model that integrates: proving teacher attraction, retention and quality. In addition, the School Board recently adopted a five-year • Continued professional growth strategic plan that commits the School System to rapid • Instructionally-focused accountability student achievement growth. The Strategic Plan in• Multiple career paths for teachers cludes strategies for improving teacher support that • Performance-based compensation41 are complementary to increasing salaries. The tax revIt would also discuss the available stipends in its twice- enue stands a greater chance of making a positive immonthly electronic newsletter for teachers, in an effort pact as part of the School System’s structured effort to to get current teachers to achieve eligibility. It would transform its professional culture and improve student ensure that teacher candidates are aware of and un- achievement. derstand the available stipends through its recruitment Supporters of the proposed tax point to the School Syspackages. tem’s difficulty attracting and retaining teachers, and BGR 17 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 Based on its independent analysis using the framework in this report, BGR finds that the current proposition overcomes the key deficiencies of the 2017 proposition. That proposal sought across-the-board raises without a thorough analysis of staffing needs and compensation disparities. It also did not seek budgeting efficiencies for cost savings or consider other priority needs, such as facilities. The new proposal offers taxpayers a better way to direct new revenue to the School System’s high-priority compensation needs. the high costs of teacher turnover. They maintain that the School System is footing the bill for training new teachers who quickly leave for higher salaries in other area districts. They warn that if the proposed tax fails, many more teachers will leave the School System, and even fewer qualified candidates will even consider it an employment option. Supporters also back the tax because they say the teacher stipends address the School System’s highest priority needs. Based on its independent analysis using the framework in this report, BGR finds that the current proposition overcomes the key deficiencies of the 2017 proposition.43 That proposal sought across-the-board raises without a thorough analysis of staffing needs and compensation disparities. It also did not seek budgeting efficiencies for cost savings or consider other priority needs, such as facilities. The new proposal offers taxpayers a better way to direct new revenue to the School System’s high-priority compensation needs. “ “ from the proposed tax would allow the School System to boost teacher pay to levels that are competitive with other area districts. More competitive salaries would help the School System overcome high teacher turnover and recurring shortages that negatively impact student achievement and drive up costs. The tax would enable the School System to implement a new pay plan that directs revenue to high-priority needs identified through its analysis of staffing trends. While the School System acknowledges that the support staff raises are not necessary to fill positions, they would eliminate existing compensation inequalities and ensure that all employees earn above poverty line wages. In addition, they would help the School System attract and keep superior employees. Although it has sought budget efficiencies, the size of raises necessary to sufficiently increase competitiveness requires additional revenue. The School Board has maximized the potential impact of higher salaries by adopting a comprehensive strategic plan that commits the School System to significant growth in student achievement by 2024. BGR POSITION If voters approve the tax, BGR recommends that the FOR. The Jefferson Parish Public School System has School System regularly review the effectiveness of the returned to voters with a more well-developed pay raise pay raises and incentive stipends in attracting and reproposal than the one voters rejected in 2017. Revenue taining high-quality employees. 18 BGR ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 ENDNOTES 1 Based on 2018 assessed value of all property in Jefferson Parish and 98% collection rate. This estimate is gross fees the School System must pay to the assessor, the sheriff (for tax collection) and payments to public retirement systems. 2 Jefferson Parish School Board Resolution, adopted January 10, 2019. 3 La. R.S. 17:3995. 4 Roberts, Faimon, “Jefferson Parish voters narrowly reject property tax for schoolteacher raises,” The Advocate, November 17, 2017. 5 Enrollment for School System operated schools and School System authorized charter schools includes students in prekindergarten through 12th grade, and is based on the October 1, 2018 enrollment count. Jefferson Parish student enrollment at State authorized charters includes students in kindergarten through 12th grade, and is based on the February 1, 2018 enrollment count. 6 Information provided by Jefferson Parish Public School System. lowest rating in four or more years. Teachers and principals receiving effective-proficient or highly effecting ratings are automatically eligible for a step increase the following year. 13 For a more detailed discussion of recent pay raises for School System employees, see Bureau of Governmental Research, On the Ballot: Jefferson Parish School Tax, November 2017. 14 La. Const. Art. VIII, Sec. 13(C). 15 Louisiana Department of Education, 2016-17 Educator Workforce Report, Southeast Region. 16 BGR calculations based on the Louisiana Department of Education’s 2016-17 Educator Workforce Report, Southeast Region. The report includes data for elementary, English, math, science, social studies and special education classes. It does not include charter schools. 17 Information on average Jefferson Parish Public School System teacher salary provided by the School System and based on salaries as of September 2018. Regional and statewide averages from the Louisiana Department of Education’s 201617 Educator Workforce Report, Southeast Region. Regional and statewide averages include charter schools. 18 Ibid. 7 For a discussion of the changes in the scoring system, see Hasselle, Della, “New Orleans-area schools see grades drop or stay flat with new, more rigorous scoring system,” The Advocate, November 8, 2018. 19 Carver-Thomas, Desiree and Linda Darling-Hammond, Teacher Turnover: Why it Matters and What We Can Do About It, prepared for the Learning Policy Institute, August 2017, p. v. 8 Based on Louisiana Department of Education district cohort graduation rates for the 2016-17 school year. Charter schools are included in geographic district in which they are located. 20 Kini, Tara and Anne Podolsky, Does Teaching Experience Increase Teacher Effectiveness? A Review of the Research, prepared for the Learning Policy Institute, June 2016, p. 15. 9 School districts throughout the country have relied on salary schedules since the early 1950s, with 96% of public school districts reporting salary schedule use in the 2003-04 school year. Podgursky, Michael and Matthew Springer, “Teacher Compensation Systems in the United States K-12 Public School System,” National Tax Journal, March 2011, pp. 165192. 21 Hasselle, Della, “‘Urgent’ need for more qualified teachers in New Orleans metro area, experts say,” The Advocate, February 17, 2019. 10 The other districts are St. Bernard, St. Helena, St. John, St. Tammany and Vermillion. Information provided by Louisiana Association of Educators and Louisiana Federation of Teachers. 11 La. Acts 2012, Reg. Sess., No. 1. 12 Louisiana’s evaluation system rates teachers and principals annually on a four level scale, from ineffective to highly effective. Under the salary schedule the School System introduced following the passage of Act 1, teachers and principals receiving an ineffective rating are not eligible for a step increase the following year. Teachers and principals receiving an effective-emerging rating are eligible for step increases the following year, but not if they have received this second-to- 22 See Hanushek, Eric A., John F. Kain and Steven G. Rivkin, “Why Public Schools Lose Teachers,” The Journal of Human Resources, Spring, 2004, pp. 326-354; Murnane, Richard J. and Randall Olsen, “The Effects of Salaries and Opportunity Costs on Length of Stay in Teaching: Evidence from North Carolina,” The Journal of Human Resources, December 1990, pp. 106-124 and Ondrich, Jan, Emily Pas and John Yinger, “The Determinants of Teacher Attrition in Upstate New York,” Public Finance Review, January 2008, pp. 112-144. 23 Carver-Thomas, Desiree and Linda Darling-Hammond. 24 Hanushek, Kain and Rivkin. 25 See Pham, Lam D., Tuan D. Nguyen and Matthew G. Springer, “Teacher Merit Pay and Student Test Scores: A MetaAnalysis,” Vanderbilt University, April 3, 2017 and Chiang, Hanley et al, Evaluation of the Teacher Incentive Fund: Final Report on Implementation and Impacts of Pay-for-Performance Across Four Years, National Center for Education BGR 19 ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, December 2017. 26 Chiang, et al. 27 See Clotfelter, Charles, Elizabeth Glennie, Helen Ladd and Jacob Vigdor, “Would higher salaries keep teachers in highpoverty schools? Evidence from a policy intervention in North Carolina,” Journal of Public Economics, June 2008, pp. 1352-1370; Feng, L., & Sass, T. R., The Impact of Incentives to Recruit and Retain Teachers in “Hard-to-Staff” Subjects, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37(1), 2018, pp. 112–135 and Podgursky, Michael and Matthew Springer, “Teacher Compensation Systems in the United States K-12 Public School System,” National Tax Journal, March 2011, pp. 165-192. 28 Podgursky and Springer. 29 The 2019 federal poverty guideline for a family of four is $25,750. See U.S. Department of Health & Human Services 2019 Poverty Guidelines. This works out to $12.38 per hour based on a 40-hour work week for 52 weeks. 30 School System employees participate in either the Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana (TRSL) or the Louisiana School Employees’ Retirement System (LSERS). In FY2018, TRSL and LSERS employer contribution rates were 26.6% and 27.6% of members’ gross earnings, respectively. 31 The fund balance portion restricted to teacher pay raises is the result of the School System’s lagged implementation of pay raises following voters’ 2003 approval of a 9-mill tax dedicated to teacher raises. While the School System first collected the tax in 2004, it did not put any pay raises into effect until 2005, and thus it did not expend the 2004 revenue from the tax. The unspent 2004 revenue is the source for the existing fund balance restricted to teacher pay raises. 32 Government Finance Officers Association, “Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund,” http://www.gfoa.org/fundbalance-guidelines-general-fund 33 Under the School System’s current salary schedule, noncertified teachers have a starting salary of $36,541 and receive a pay increase for each additional year of work. The salary for noncertified teachers would be$37,000, regardless of experience, under the proposed pay plan. The proposed plan will also freeze the salaries of noncertified teachers already working in the School System and currently earning more than $37,000 at their current levels until certification is achieved. 34 Tammany does not guarantee annual payment of performance stipends. 35 St. John will begin paying these stipends in the 2019-20 school year. See Hasselle, Della, “‘Urgent’ need for more qualified teachers in New Orleans metro area, experts say,” The Advocate, February 17, 2018. 20 BGR 36 Roberts, Faimon A., “Jefferson School Board approves $22,500 settlement for woman who alleged harassment,” The Advocate, March 13, 2019. 37 Government Finance Officers Association, “Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund,” http://www.gfoa.org/fundbalance-guidelines-general-fund 38 Standard & Poor’s, “S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ‘AA’ long-term rating on Jefferson Parish School Board,” July 20, 2018. 39 See Rivkin, Steven G., Eric A, Hanushek and John F. Kain, “Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement,” Econometrica, March 2005, pp. 417-458 and Sanders, William L. and Sandra P. Horn, “Research Findings from the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) Database: Implications for Educational Evaluation and Research,” Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12:3 247-256, 1998. 40 Jefferson Parish Schools, 2024 The Future Our Kids Deserve, February 6, 2019. 41 System for Teacher and Student Advancement (TAP) initiated by the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET). 42 Jefferson Parish Public School System, Advancing the PK-8 Model, presented March 14, 2019. 43 Bureau of Governmental Research, On the Ballot: Jefferson Parish School Tax, November 2017. ON THE BALLOT: JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL TAX PROPOSAL, MAY 4, 2019 BGR Review Committee Hardy B. Fowler, Chair Tara Adams Anne P. Baños Maureen Clary Louis M. Freeman, Jr. Andrew R. Lee Todd McDonald Melissa Sawyer Dennis Woltering BGR Board of Directors Christine Albert Charmaine Caccioppi Ludovico Feoli Norma Grace Gary L. Lorio Jennifer Medbery Steven W. Usdin BGR Project Staff Amy L. Glovinsky, President & CEO Stephen Stuart, Vice President & Research Director Susie Dudis, Research Analyst This report is available on BGR’s web site, www.bgr.org. Become a Member To preserve its independence, BGR relies on financial support from a diverse membership of individuals, corporations and foundations. To find out how you can become a part of BGR, go to www.bgr.org/membership or call us at 504-525-4152 x108. Officers Ludovico Feoli, Chair Norma Grace, Vice Chair H. Merritt Lane, III, Secretary Maureen Clary, Treasurer Nathalie G. Simon, Assistant Secretary Anne P. Baños, Assistant Treasurer Past Chairman Hardy B. Fowler Board Members Tara Adams Christine Albert Susan G. Brennan Kelly R. Brown Charmaine Caccioppi Andrea Chen Jaimmé A. Collins Leah N. Engelhardt Louis M. Freeman, Jr. Alex Gershanik Hunter G. Hill Andrew R. Lee Gary L. Lorio Martin Mayer Todd McDonald Jennifer Medbery Jennifer M. Neil Jennifer Roberts Melissa Sawyer Slade Simons Blake J. Stanfill Steven W. Usdin Larry Washington Dennis Woltering Honorary Board Harry J. Blumenthal, Jr. Edgar L. Chase III J. Kelly Duncan Louis M. Freeman Richard W. Freeman, Jr. Ronald J. French David Guidry Hans B. Jonassen Diana M. Lewis Mark A. Mayer Anne M. Milling R. King Milling Lynes R. Sloss Sterling Scott Willis The Bureau of Governmental Research is a private, nonprofit, independent research organization dedicated to informed public policy making and the effective use of public resources for the improvement of government in the New Orleans metropolitan area. BUREAU OF GOVERNMENTAL RESEARCH 1055 St. Charles Ave., Suite 200 New Orleans, LA 70130 Phone 504-525-4152 www.bgr.org @bgrnola