Archives for category: Nevada

The Lt. Governor has a powerful role in Texas government. Unfortunately, the Lt. Gov. right now is Dan Patrick, a former radio talk show host, who is a zealous supporter of vouchers. When he headed the Senate Education Committee, he put forward voucher bills but they died in the House. They died because of rural opposition to vouchers; it seems that rural Republicans in the House don’t see any good reason to kill off their public schools and divide their communities.

 

But Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick now says he wants “education savings accounts” so that public money can flow to private and religious schools, as well as homeschoolers, and he wants to model his plan along the lines of the one enacted in Nevada. It is still public money going to religious schools, but that’s what he wants. As he says in the article, he wants school choice for all children, not just the poor.

 

The Nevada plan is being challenged in court by several organizations, because it violates the explicit language of the Nevada state constitution. Studies show that it primarily benefits well-to-do families, not poor families.

 

As in most other states, about 90% of the children in Texas go to public schools. Those schools are underfunded, especially since a dramatic $5.4 billion cut in 2011. Some of the money was later restored, but not most of it. The children in Texas are poorer than they were five years ago. The pupils are majority-minority. This is the scenario in which Dan Patrick proposes to gut public education.

 

It is time for the Texas Pastors for Children, for Friends of Texas Public Schools, and for every organization that believes in democratic control of public schools in Texas to step up and beat back Patrick’s bills.

Nevada’s new voucher program is the most radical in the nation. Of course, it is not called a “voucher” program, but “education savings accounts.” A rose by any other name. A stinkweed by any other name. You can call a stinkweed a rose, but it is still a stinkweed. The ESA will accomplish the same purpose as vouchers, by transferring public funds to private and religious schools.

 

Since the Republicans took control of the Legislature, school choice has been their top priority in education. This is their answer to the financial woes of Nevada’s underfunded public schools.

 

Says the article, “Nevada’s public schools are in the toilet. The Silver State consistently ranks near the bottom when it comes to education spending. Things got so dreary in the mid-2000’s that the state even amended its constitution with “Nevada Fund Education First,” a measure to ensure the education budget is determined before all other items. Even worse, Education Week ranked Nevada dead last in 2014 in a “Chance for Success” analysis that combined data on student achievement, state spending, and standards and accountability.” 

 

But why fund the schools when you can pass a school choice measure instead? The bonus is that you can call yourself a reformer as you are drawing even more money away from the schools that the majority of the state’s children attend.

 

Funny, the Nevada state constitution bars the use of public money for religious schools. Two-thirds of the private schools in Nevada are religious schools.

 

The Nevada Constitution states that, “No public funds of any kind or character whatever, State, County or Municipal, shall be used for sectarian purpose.” Anything ambiguous about that?

 

Nevada law also states in NRS 387.045 that, “No portion of the public school funds shall in any way be segregated, divided or set apart for the use or benefit of any sectarian or secular society or association.” Anything ambiguous about that?

 

Remember when conservatives used to be “strict constructionists” of state and federal Constitutions?

 

But that was then. Now, conservatives, led by ALEC, have set their sights on privatizing public education.

 

Don’t expect vouchers to reduce the achievement gaps between rich and poor: “It doesn’t promote better schooling for low-income [kids],” said Martin Carnoy, a professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Education. “It’s going to benefit new private-school providers and current private-school providers…It’s welfare for the rich.”

The radical right and their allies claim they are strict constructionists of the Constitution. They don’t feel the same way about State Constitutions. Even when the State Constitution explicitly says that public money is to be used only for public schools, the far-right celebrates when the Legislature passes a voucher program that violates the State Constitution.

This is the case in Nevada, where the Constitution is very clear about where public money should go: to public schools only. Yet Nevada passed the most sweeping voucher legislation in the nation, and the allegedly strict constructionists have thrown their principles to the wind. The fact is that they care more about free markets than about the State Constitution.

Here is the complaint that was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs challenging Nevada’s sweeping voucher law.

“EducateNevadaNow” is the organization that is leading the charge against vouchers. Here is its question-and-answer sheet about the lawsuit:


On September 9, 2015, a group of parents whose children attend Nevada public schools filed a lawsuit challenging the State’s new voucher law. The lawsuit, Lopez v. Schwartz, has generated media attention and interest from parents, educators and taxpayers.

Today’s frequently asked questions focus on what the parents hope to achieve and next steps in the process.

Q: Are the parents suing for money damages?

A: No. The parents are only suing to stop the voucher program and keep it from taking away funding from the education of their children in the public schools. They are not asking for any money. Additionally, the attorneys representing the parents are providing their legal services for free or “pro bono.”

FACT: The Nevada Constitution states that the funding provided for public schools can only be used to operate those schools and not for any other purposes.

Q: What are the next steps in the parents’ lawsuit?

A: The case has been filed before Judge James Wilson in Carson City, Nevada. The parents will be asking Judge Wilson to declare the voucher law unconstitutional and to block the State Treasurer from implementing the voucher law.

Elaine Wynn, president of the Nevada state board of education, said that the teacher shortage had become a dangerous situation for the schools. The shortages are most pronounced in schools enrolling high proportions of low-scoring and poor children.

Nevada’s two largest school districts this week said they’d hired hundreds of first-time teachers over the summer with the help of recruiters, billboards and even a Clark County superintendent zip-lining through downtown Las Vegas in a superhero cape.

But when it was Nevada Board of Education President Elaine Wynn’s chance to speak about the nearly 1,000 teacher positions statewide that still remain vacant and are being filled with stopgap measures such as long-term subs, she didn’t mince words.

“I don’t think I’ve ever been this alarmed in my job as I have been today,” Wynn said at a board meeting Thursday, calling the situation a human resource crisis. “We’re going to all sink. This is horrific.”

Nevada is suffering an acute teacher shortage as its student population rises and its primary supplier of educators — California — deals with a shortage of its own. Colleges there are producing fewer teaching graduates, and Nevada colleges are far from being able to churn out enough homegrown education graduates to meet the state’s needs.

Some blame the shortage on low pay, especially for first-year teachers, and a general lack of respect for the profession.

Educators know that the growing teacher shortage is a direct result of more than a decade of failed reforms, especially those that blame teachers for low test scores. If the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation, and the Obama administration keep up their attacks on teaching, who will want to teach in any district?

Board members, as usual for non-educators, are willing to hire anyone anywhere to be teachers in the schools of Nevada.

Board members underscored that the districts can’t stave off the teacher shortage alone.

Kevin Melcher, who’s also a regent for the Nevada System of Higher Education, suggested recruiting the spouses of workers who move to Nevada for jobs with the new Tesla battery factory under construction east of Reno.

“Is there a way we can work with these new industries … to help them recruit for us?” he said.

Wynn, who co-founded the Wynn Resorts casino company with her ex-husband Steve Wynn, said districts could learn from professionals in the casino industry who fill positions and attract throngs of people to nightclubs.

She also called for making the teacher shortage a recurring item on state board agendas.

“We can’t be satisfied to let this continue,” Wynn said. “To take comfort that it’s a national emergency — that’s not the Nevada way.”

Now here is the question: What can schools learn from the casino industry? Put slot machines into the schools? Have gaming tables in the lunch room? Offer free sodas?

Las Vegas (Clark County) has engaged in various theatrical appeals, such as the superintendent “zip-lining” down a major street in the city, wearing a red Superman cape.

Richard Ingersoll, who studies teacher recruitment and retention, says the biggest problem–and the biggest solution– facing Las Vegas and other districts is not finding new teachers, but retaining and supporting the teachers they have now.

“Well-paying jobs with good conditions don’t have to have gimmicks to attract quality people,” says Richard Ingersoll, a professor of education at the University of Pennsylvania who studies teacher demographics and retention. “You have to put your money where your mouth is, or I guess in this case where your zip line is.” He says districts should focus on retention instead of flashy recruitment techniques. “It’s not that we can’t recruit new teachers; it’s that we lose too many.”

Angie Sullivan teaches kindergarten students in Las Vegas. Many of her students are poor. This was the discussion at the last board meeting. The board decided to spend $613,325 on more testing.

“The last thing African American students need is additional testing.

Vegas is facing a crisis. A severe and drastic teacher shortage in urban Vegas.

African American students are more likely to have no teacher.

We are missing teachers. 30,000 kids without a teacher? The school named after Martin Luther King has 8 licensed teachers and everyone else is temporary. A staff of 70 substitutes?

But we will add more testing to already at-risk kids?

African American Victory schools had an almost 100% White Administrative Staff show up this evening to ask for more testing.

An administrator speaking to the board just claimed: kids are sad when they cannot be tested? Really?

Does the school board really believe that more data of any sort will be key to improvement?

More testing is useful? Formative or summative?

This teacher will state clearly. This is a tragedy.

I would love to see the full deal. And who this vendor really is that just sideswiped the usual vendor approval process. Who is connected to this vendor and to this deal? Garvey brought the legality up several times. Good point. Voted yes anyhow.

No teachers. No teachers. No teachers.

Where is the additional support? This is supposed to help a teacher who does not exist? This will help the substitute?

Not negotiating in good faith.

Yes to testing? No to teachers.

Great example how priorities are skewed and how bad choices are made.

If you dont help kids – which is work done by skilled labor – all the data in the world is useless. It is people on the ground who love kids – who will turn schools around or help at-risk kids.

Bad mistake.

Tragedy.

And legislators – the board blamed you several times this evening for not giving them much time. Seems they do not value you either. They routinely blame you. They blame me too.

Join the club.”

“Angie.”

The latest from Nevada, where the ACLU-Nevada is already suing to block vouchers. Another suit is filed:

ALERT! Public School Parents And Children File Lawsuit To Declare Nevada Vouchers Unconstitutional
Vouchers Violate Nevada Constitutional Ban on Diverting Public School Funding to Private Schools

Today, five parents whose children attend Nevada public schools filed a lawsuit challenging the State’s new voucher law – Senate Bill 302. The lawsuit claims that the voucher law violates the Nevada Constitution’s explicit ban on using public school funding for private schools. The lawsuit also seeks to permanently block the State Treasurer from implementing the voucher program.

In enacting SB302, the Nevada Legislature authorized the most expansive program of private school vouchers in the United States. The voucher law directs the State Treasurer to deposit funds appropriated by the Legislature for the operation of the Nevada public schools into private accounts to pay for private school tuition, online classes, home-based curriculums and related expenses, tutoring, transportation to and from private schools, and other private expenses.

The parents and students filed the lawsuit, Lopez v. Schwartz, in the First Judicial District Court in Carson City. More public school parents and their children are expected to join the lawsuit in the coming weeks.

Educate Nevada Now (ENN), a campaign of The Rogers Foundation, assembled a team of experienced Nevada and national attorneys to ensure that Nevada law protects and advances education opportunities for all children. ENN is supporting this lawsuit because it addresses using public funding for private schools, an issue of vital importance to all Nevada public school children and taxpayers – and one that must be resolved by the Nevada courts.

“The Nevada Constitution makes it crystal clear that the funding provided for our public schools can only be used to operate those schools, and not for any other purpose,” said Justin Jones, an attorney with Wolf, Rifkin, Shapiro, Schulman & Rabkin LLP, Nevada-based pro bono counsel for the plaintiffs. “The voucher law, by taking funding out of the public schools to pay for private school tuition and other private services, blatantly violates this explicit mandate enshrined in our state constitution.”

The parents and students contend that the voucher law violates the Education Article of the Nevada Constitution in three ways:

⦁ The voucher law by its terms diverts funds earmarked by the Legislature exclusively for the operation of the public schools to pay for private schools and other private expenditures.

⦁ The voucher law reduces State-guaranteed funding for the public schools below the level determined to be sufficient by the Legislature in the biennium budgets.

⦁ The voucher law allows public school funding to pay for private schools that do not have to comply with the “uniform” non-discrimination, education performance and accountability standards all Nevada public schools must follow.

The parents filed the lawsuit to prevent loss of funding from their children’s public schools to pay for private schools. Under SB302, even families who can readily afford to pay the full cost of private school tuition are eligible to receive public funds. The voucher law will reduce funding for the public schools while at the same time requiring those schools to educate a higher concentration of high needs children, including students with disabilities, English language learners, and students at risk due to family and neighborhood poverty, homelessness, transiency and other disadvantages.

“The voucher law undermines our uniform system of public schools which the Legislature is constitutionally obligated to maintain and support with sufficient funding,” said Sylvia Lazos, Policy Director for Educate Nevada Now. “This lawsuit does not challenge the right of parents to choose a private or religious school for their child. But it does seek to ensure that public school funding is not diverted and depleted by subsidizing that choice.”

The complaint filed today complements the lawsuit filed by ACLU-Nevada last week to block the use of taxpayer funds for religious schooling but raises a separate and independent basis under the Nevada constitution for invalidating the voucher law.

In addition to the Wolf, Rifkin attorneys, David Sciarra and Amanda Morgan of the non-profit Education Law Center (ELC) in Newark, NJ, and Las Vegas, a partner in the ENN campaign, are representing the students and parents. They are also represented pro bono by Tamerlin Godley, Litigation Partner, and associates from Munger, Tolles and Olson in Los Angeles.

Read the complaint.

http://www.educatenevadanow.com

Vouchers are a bad idea, and the public doesn’t support them. Time after time, vouchers have been put on state ballots, and every single time they have been defeated. They were defeated overwhelmingly in Utah in 2007, with 62%-38% of the vote, and defeated most recently in Florida in 2012, by a vote of 58%-42%. Yet, with the help of the far-right ALEC and its model legislation, several state legislatures have created voucher programs without going to the voters. Even in states that explicitly ban the use of public funds for religious institutions, the legislatures have coined some euphemism like “opportunity scholarship” or, as in Nevada, “education savings accounts.” A voucher is a voucher is a voucher.

I tweeted this message; I hope you will too: Should taxpayer $ go to religious schools? @ACLUNV says no & Nevada agrees. Support separation of church & state! http://bit.ly/1XhsFyg

Here is an appeal from the ACLU:

Last week we filed a major lawsuit against the state of Nevada to stop the voucher program that diverts taxpayer funds to religious schools. The program was passed by the Nevada Legislature and signed by Governor Sandoval this year.

Parents have a right to send their children to religious schools, but they are not entitled to do so at taxpayers’ expense. Do you want your tax dollars going to fund a parent’s preferred religious school choice? We don’t and that’s why we are suing to stop it.

Proponents of the new program bristle at our use of the term “voucher” instead of their preferred description of “education savings accounts,” but we do that because we know better — these accounts will do nothing to save education, but will in fact destroy education across the state. Is it any wonder why this program was written and proposed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)?

In just three short days we have seen those who seek to dismantle public education and divert education money to private religious purposes attack us and the plaintiffs for daring to thwart their plans. They are even attacking Ruby Duncan, the lead plaintiff and longtime civil rights, education, and welfare rights champion. What these pro-voucher forces don’t know is how firmly we believe this voucher program violates the separation of church and state and how resolute Ruby is in standing up for kids and providing them the education that they deserve. Ruby was honored when a school was named after her to recognize all the work she has done in making sure every child is educated and now they want to question her motives.

Share this victory with your friends, family, and any allies that believe that liberty is only possible when the separation of church and state is secure.

Sincerely,

Tod Story
Executive Director
ACLU of Nevada

P.S. Lawsuits are hard work, they require resources, and take time, but we are in this until the end. We need your help in ensuring we can fight this battle all the way to the Nevada Supreme Court. Donate now to help provide the resources we need in this battle — and in all our efforts to protect your rights.

At last! Three civil liberties groups have sued to block the implementation of “education savings accounts” in Nevada, which are vouchers that will be used in religious schools.

LAS VEGAS – Three civil liberties organizations filed suit today in Nevada District Court to challenge a school voucher program signed into law last June by Gov. Brian Sandoval. The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued on behalf of a group of parents, clergy, and other taxpayers who oppose the program’s effort to divert taxpayer money to private, religious schools.

“Parents have a right to send their children to religious schools, but they are not entitled to do so at taxpayers’ expense. The voucher program violates the Nevada Constitution’s robust protections against the use of public funds for religious education,” said Tod Story, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada. “This program allows public money to be spent at intuitions which operate with sectarian missions and goals and impart sectarian curricula. This is exactly what the Nevada Constitution forbids.”

Under the program, parents of students enrolled in public school for at least 100 days may transfer their children to participating private schools, including religious schools, and are eligible to receive thousands of dollars in public education funds to pay for tuition, textbooks, and other associated costs. The funds will be disbursed through so-called “Education Savings Accounts,” and there are no restrictions on how participating schools can use the money.

The lawsuit argues that the funding scheme violates Article XI Section 10 of the Nevada Constitution, which prohibits the use of public funds for any sectarian purpose. The lawsuit also claims that the program runs afoul of Article XI, Section 2, which requires the legislature to provide for a uniform system of common schools.

“The voucher program will use taxpayer dollars for religious education and indoctrination at a number of religious schools, many of which discriminate in admissions and employment,” said Heather L. Weaver, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “The program would be a huge loss for religious liberty if implemented.”

I get excited whenever I see an article in the New York Times that speaks common sense about education. It is a newspaper with national reach. Television producers of news shows always read the Times. I get a sense of hope.

Brittany Bronson, a regular contributor to the Op-Ed page, has an article about the voucher program in Nevada, and she sees how it will work. It won’t help poor kids. It will be used by middle-parents to exit the public schools. It will reduce the diversity in public schools.

Vouchers won’t cure what ails our low-income families. They will only reinforce the assumption that our private schools are successful and public ones are not, that the education system is broken. But it’s not the schools alone that are broken; they are a loose wheel in a system that is malfunctioning on a much grander scale.

In Nevada, about one in four children live in poverty, not because their schools have failed them, but because their parents juggle multiple jobs on a stagnant minimum wage, have little job security and are denied paid time off.

The Anne E. Casey Foundation argues that improving the well-being of children in poverty requires a two-generation approach, meaning you can’t improve the situation for children without addressing the economic realities of their parents. Its 2015 report states that, “Boosting low family income, especially early in a child’s life, can have lasting positive effects on cognitive development, health, and academic achievement.”

These economic challenges present direct conflicts with the type of parental involvement and support that are necessary for quality education. Erratic and unpredictable work hours make it difficult to organize transportation to and from school and after-school child care. Long workdays limit parents’ ability to ensure that children’s academic responsibilities outside of school are being met. Low wages without benefits make it impossible to afford enriching activities outside the classroom or quality health care that plays a crucial role in academic success.

Nevada parents do need choices, but far more than these vouchers can provide.

When you think of Las Vegas, you think of hotels and gambling, but Las Vegas also has a large school system, the Clark County School District. It enrolls more than 300,000 students and spends less than $7,000 per student. It is the fifth largest school district in the nation, and legislators have launched a process to break up CCSD into four districts. Critics say it will allow wealthy communities to secede and reenforce segregation. The district is dealing with budget issues, and class sizes are huge: 32:1 in fourth and fifth grades, and higher in higher grades.

Like many districts, CCSD has a serious teacher shortage. School opens today, and there are 900 vacancies for teachers.

The district hired 200 more teachers in May than it did during the same month last year, but teachers are leaving the district at an alarming rate.

More than 1,600 CCSD teachers quit the profession this past school year, up by about 600 over the past five years. Only around a third of those are due to retirements. Yearly resignations count for 6 percent of the total number of licensed teachers in the district.

Educators on the frontlines often say it’s the result of bad morale among those in the profession.
“This is the worst it’s been in all my years,” said Katie Decker, principal of Bracken and Long elementary schools.

“The amount of demands that are placed on them now, it’s a much tougher job than was placed on them years ago,” she said. “You gotta shift the culture.”

Decker, a nationally recognized principal known for her common sense leadership, took charge of Long this year as part of the district’s “school franchise” program. The elementary school is short eight full-time teachers going into this year, though long-term subs are lined up to fill the gaps for the time being.

Shortages are especially persistent at inner city schools like Long, where 76 percent of the student body is Latino and 77 percent qualify for free and reduced-price lunch. At Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary, near Nellis Air Force Base, 93 percent of students qualify for free and reduced lunch. The school is also short 20 full-time teachers, the worst shortage in the district. By comparison, earlier this year Canyon Springs High School had the worst shortage at around 10 vacant positions.