The fortieth and final day of the 2009 session of the Georgia General Assembly was a long one and was filled with the usual last-day pressures, tensions, and shenanigans that observers have come to expect.  By the time the final gavel fell at midnight, legislators in both chambers were voting frantically on conference committee reports on bills, reports that they had not had time to read or digest.  Speaker Glenn Richardson quoted the legendary Tom Murphy, the long-serving Speaker of the House, who said of the last day:  "These are dangerous times."  How true that turned out to be in several cases.

Of key interest to readers of this site was the final resolution of the budget negotiations for FY2010.  When the House-Senate compromise was reached, the documents printed, and (by rule) laid on the desks of legislators for one hour before they could be considered, it was early evening.  However, the late hour did not prove to be a problem, as both the House and the Senate heard only brief explanations of the compromise from their respective Appropriations Committee chairmen.  Both chambers approved the FY201 Budget in short order.  In the world of education, highlights/lowlights are as follows:

• At the Department of Education level, personnel and contract cuts of $4.6 million ($1.4 million more than had been recommended by the Governor) were followed by cuts of $2 million ($1.5 million more than recommended by the Governor) in School Improvement.  In addition, the Testing division suffered a $900,000 cut, and the “operations” end of the Technology/Career Education division was cut by $503,000;
• Graduation coaches ($49 million line item) were put into the QBE program, giving local systems the decisions as to how to manage those funds (no expenditure requirements attached), and the money allotted for classroom gift cards ($11 million) was completely eliminated;
• RESA’s ($12.1 million after a 3% cut), ETTC’s  ($2.75 million), and the Georgia Virtual School (even added $1.1 million to support an additional 2,000 courses) all remained as separate line items in the budget;
• Included in the budget was enough money to pay teachers who have earned the National Board certificate ten percent of the base state salary for a beginning teacher (Problem:  HB 243, the Senate version of which would have authorized spending the money in this fashion, failed to gain the approval of the House.  Local systems will await direction from the state as to how to compensate these teachers in light of this predicament.);
• Austerity cuts, of major interest to the readers of this site, are included in the budget in several amounts.  The totals are: $93 million remaining as a “base” cut from the FY2009 Budget plus another $147 million (caused by a lowered revenue estimate) plus an additional $50 million (left over from the previous year) for a total (thus far) of $290 million.  Added to that is an additional austerity cut of $413 million, but that additional cut is “covered” by funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, or “stimulus funds”) in the amount of $413 million.  So to summarize the austerity cut lines, systems are actually being cut by some $703 million, but federal funds will offset $413 million of that;
• Also included is a major new cut that only affects 75% of systems (the poorest, based on the wealth-per-student-in-local-dollars method of determining those eligible for these funds), and that is a cut to the equalization grant program.  The total cut is listed as $112 million in the FY2010 budget (cuts to be prorated across all equalization grant-eligible systems), but in reality is closer to $200 million since the grant, had it been properly calculated for FY2010, would have actually increased by some $80 million from FY2009;
• The pupil transportation program, long underfunded, was cut by another $2.5 million;
• After an outcry from PTA’s and others, school nurse funding was returned to the budget, but the $30 million line item was reduced by 3%, leaving $29.1 million;
• Regular and Exceptional Growth capital outlay programs were funded at the 80% level, and the vocational equipment bonds were funded at $7 million; and,
• In a series of smaller cuts, the elementary foreign language money was completely eliminated ($384,000), funds to support food processing plants were reduced by $100,000, the teacher liability insurance program was zeroed out ($300,000), and even the charter implementation grants were reduced by $500,000.

In the realm of education legislation, bill after bill after bill went flying back and forth between the House and the Senate on this final night, each being amended right and left by influential legislators who simply “had” to have “their bills” passed.  In this author’s humble opinion, the procedures used on this last night make a complete mockery of the committee process that occurs on the other 39 days of the session.  During the session, legislators spend countless hours attending committee meetings, listening to testimony, questioning presenters, and debating among themselves, most giving their very best in an honest attempt to see that good legislation emerges from their committees and makes it through the process.  But on this one night…..  [Editor’s note:  Exhibit “A” of how this worked was the inclusion and passage (as part of an amended bill) of Representative Fran Millar’s BRIDGE bill, HB 400.  While this author has no major issue with that bill, it was amended onto another bill on this 40^th day and passed both chambers of the General Assembly without one minute of discussion of the bill by a Senate committee or by the full Senate.  How lawmaking is actually done!]

But, to the crux of the matter.  What passed on this last evening and now head to the Governor were:

• HB 193, the bill originally doing nothing more than changing the 180-student-days-of-school requirement to an equivalent number of hours.  Attached to this bill, which passed both chambers, were the contents of SB 250 (defines “disruption of a public school” in a way that, frankly, may well make it more difficult to prosecute such cases) and a redundant statement that schools may be closed on Veteran’s Day each year.
• HB 251, a bill that mandated school choice within districts with each local board of education required to develop a “streamlined process” to administer this new state mandate.  This bill, which was approved in the confusion of the last ten minutes on this fortieth day, apparently included the nepotism provisions originally included in SB 84 (the school board governance bill, which did not pass).  It was clear to observers (and, to some members of the House of Representatives) that many members were unaware that this provision had been stuck into this bill at the very last minute (The bill’s author certainly did not emphasize that fact when she spoke from the well and pleaded for the bill’s passage!), and the close “yea” vote may well have gone the other way had members known what they were voting on!
• SB 178, a bill that became a much-discussed “omnibus” education bill that included four others:  The aforementioned BRIDGE bill, the contents of  the original HB 278 (temporary waiver of expenditure controls), the contents of SB 178 (extends the sunset dates on the state’s school capital outlay statutes), and language insisted upon by Lieutenant Governor Cagle (pays local school systems full FTE credit for dual enrollment students as long as those students attend their courses at a charter school or at a high school pursuant to an agreement between the local school system and a postsecondary institution).
• HB 455, the bill originally intended to extend the teacher contract issuance deadline date to May 15 for this year only.  Added to this bill was a provision abolishing the sunset date in the Master Teacher statute as well as language that, beginning this coming July, would prohibit classroom teachers who earn administrative certificates from being paid for those certificates unless they are in administrative positions.
• SB 114, a state version of the Interstate Compact for Children of Military Families, said version seeking to make the inevitable school transfers of these children easier.

Readers of this site are aware that a number of tax-related proposals (or, should we say “tax cut-related proposals) were on the docket for consideration during these last days, and while some were adopted, others will have to wait until the 2010 session for their next chance.  For example, while a two-year moratorium on increases in the assessed value of properties passed, the bill to eliminate the ad valorem tax on vehicles did not.  While the proposed constitutional amendment to place limits on the annual increase in the value of property could not muster enough support, a one-year moratorium on ad valorem taxation of “heavy equipment” was successful.

As stated earlier, though, all of the bills that received the requisite constitutional majority of votes now head to Governor Perdue for his consideration.  He has 40 days from the end of the session to sign the bills into law, veto them, or simply allow them to become law without his signature.  GSSA will follow that process carefully and report to members and others on that process.