House Democrats take on CSAP tests

Bill would drop some writing, math and science sections
May 1, 2008By Joe Hanel | Herald Denver Bureau
DENVER - Democrats pushed through a major rollback of standardized testing Wednesday, voting for a bill to eliminate all writing tests from the Colorado Student Assessment Program as well as some reading, math and science tests.

The Federal NCLB law requires a lot of tests -- the bill eliminates that tests that aren't required by federal law. That will save us $10 million a year and the bill puts that money back into real education two ways:preventing high school students from dropping out ongoing education for teachers

Rep. Judy Solano, D-Brighton, advanced two bills to cut back the CSAP. House Bill 1357, which the House gave its initial approval, pares back the CSAP to the minimum standard required by the federal No Child Left Behind law. That means eliminating all writing tests, the reading and math tests in grades nine and 10, and the 10th-grade science test.

Solano's other bill, HB 1186, prohibits schools from punishing students who skip the CSAP test. The House gave it final approval Wednesday, sending it to Gov. Bill Ritter for his signature.

But Solano's first bill has put her at odds with the sponsors of Ritter's major education-reform plan, which he calls the Colorado Achievement Plan for Kids, or CAP4K.

Which is odd because one of the two key arguments for CAP4K is that are current standards are wrong and have to be rewritten. The CSAPs test how well kids have learned the state standards. If the state standards are wrong, why not (at least) eliminate the CSAPs that aren't required by federal law.

(The second arguement for CAP4K is weird. It's that when kids in Colorado aren't learning, it's because we don't test them enough).

"CAP4K will rebuild the entire house. House Bill 1357 repaints the front door," said Rep. Rob Witwer, R-Genesee, one of the sponsors of the CAP4K bill, Senate Bill 212.

"CAP4K will end CSAP as we know it, but in its place will put relevant, timely assessments," Witwer said.

So we've been slavishly following state standards that turn out to be irrelevant and untimely. How many students, parents, teachers, schools and communities have been harassed, threatened and insulted over their CSAP results? Now we're admitting the CSAPs test the wrong things.

Officials from Ritter's Department of Education testified against Solano's bill at a hearing several weeks ago.

"The governor will have to decide if these two bills can mesh," Solano said.

CSAP's critics say the results aren't useful because grades come in too late to help individual students. The CAP4K bill will tie the new tests to new curriculum standards that will focus on college preparation.

But they'll be developed by the same people who came up with the CSAPs.

But Solano found many allies among fellow Democrats who dislike standardized tests in general when she pushed ahead with HB 1357 on Wednesday.

Rep. Mike Merrifield, D-Colorado Springs, sang an anti-CSAP song to the tune of "On Top of Old Smoky."

"Don't think about thinking - it's not on the test," Merrifield sang.

Colorado's obsession with testing has robbed the passion from teaching and the love of learning from students, said Merrifield, a retired teacher.Rep. Ray Rose, R-Montrose, led the defense of CSAPs for Republicans.

Critics are wrong when they say schools "teach to the test," Rose said."We teach to children the knowledge they need, and then we test them to see if they've absorbed that information," he said.

Well, not really. The Dept. of Education, which wrote the standards, now says those standards are bad.

Earlier in the morning, the House gave final approval to Solano's other bill, HB 1186.

It prevents schools from punishing students who skip the CSAP. Solano said schools have withheld credits or permission to join school activities.

But schools still will be penalized when students skip, a fact that irritated Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder.

"What this preserves is the true idiocy of the school-accountability system," Pommer said. "The teacher gets penalized, the school gets penalized, but there's no penalty for the individual student."

We would never pass a law saying if you get caught speeding we fine someone else. But our so-called "school accountability" law says students don't have to take the CSAP but, if they don't, we subtract points from the results of the students who did take the test. What sense does that make?

Without the penalty, three Southwest Colorado schools would have had higher scores on last year's School Accountability Reports. Florida Mesa Elementary in Durango and Dolores Middle School would have gone from average to high, and Pleasant View Elementary north of Cortez would have gone from low to average.

Think about that. Under stand a federal law a school can get shut down if it doesn't do well on the CSAPs. There are schools all across the state that have lost points because students, with their parents permission, chose not take the test.

Additional votes on both the CAP4K bill and Solano's CSAP bill are scheduled for today.

New rules blamed for cuts in oil, gas drilling

Gargi Chakrabarty
Friday, April 18, 2008

As much as $1 billion in oil and gas investment is bypassing Colorado because of what the industry perceives as interference from Gov. Bill Ritter's administration, state legislators told the Rocky Mountain News this week.

Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, said several energy companies have told him they are cutting back on new investment that amounts to up to $1 billion. Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, said he has heard similar complaints from energy lobbyists, but he puts the amount at $500 million.

Oil & Gas lobbyists tell Josh Penry they're broke and starving, Penry tells the newspapers and they print it. Since the oil & gas industry started complaining about having to follow some rules, they've consistently increased the number of wells they're drilling here.

The companies say the Ritter administration's overhaul of drilling rules is not only turning Colorado into an uncertain regulatory climate but also increasing the cost of doing business.

"It's clear that the energy sector is significantly scaling back new investment in Colorado," Penry said. "There's tremendous uncertainty regarding where the new rules are headed, or what they mean. The sooner the certainty can be established, the better it is for Colorado."

Clear? What's clear is that they're drilling here more and more. It would be nice if the reporter would ask for some evidence rather than just assuming it's "clear."

The proposed rules were prompted by mounting complaints from residents living near rigs about noise, odor and adverse impacts on health, environment and wildlife. Some rules are scheduled to go into effect July 1.

"We'd be disappointed to see a company reducing their investment in Colorado," said Dave Neslin, acting director of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission - the state agency writing the rules.

State officials and environmental groups supporting the proposed rules were skeptical that investment was being cut down because of regulatory reasons. Rather, Colorado's weak gas prices - the result of pipeline constraints - is the probable reason, they said.

With the oil and gas companies pleading poverty and complaining about how unfairly they're treated, when all they really want to do is offer us low-priced energy, it's easy to forget that they're actually for-profit corporations. If prices are low, they'd rather not sell us energy.

EnCana Oil and Gas has said the new regulatory hurdles caused them to bypass Colorado while deciding where to spend $500 million in additional investment. The money went to Texas and Wyoming, they told the Rocky.

But on its Web site, EnCana touts the Piceance Basin in Garfield County as its "fastest- growing and highest potential resource play in the U.S."

Also, in a 2007 report, EnCana said: "Natural gas per unit production and mineral taxes in the U.S. decreased $0.15 per Mcf - or 31 percent in 2007 compared to 2006 - mainly as a result of lower natural gas prices in the U.S. Rockies and a reduction in the severance and ad valorem effective tax rate for Colorado properties."

EnCana spokesman Doug Hock said the company hedges production; hence, lower prices don't impact investment strategy. Moreover, the newly built Rockies pipeline is pushing up prices.

"Regulatory climate is part of business. You can't separate those two," Hock said. "We looked at this jurisdiction versus others and chose to allocate the majority of investment elsewhere."

Pioneer Natural Resources says its budget this year is $100 million less than last year because of additional (proposed) rules and related costs.

But Neslin took issue. "In an investor presentation dated April 2008, Pioneer said profits are going to increase due to operations in the Raton basin," he said. "It's hard to reconcile that with a statement that they are reducing operations in Colorado."

EnCana and Pioneer are among 600 companies operating in Colorado. Their decision comes as the energy industry continues its boom, with requests for drilling permits already more than 400 ahead of last year and on track to break the 2007 record of nearly 6,400 drilling applications.

"I can guarantee the oil and gas is not going anywhere," said Mike Chiropolos with Boulder- based Western Resource Advocates. "Somebody will come along and be willing and excited about developing that oil and gas in compliance with new rules, and who can turn a profit."

Romer said he believed companies were changing their investment strategy, but it was a temporary phenomenon.

New pipelines, coupled with appropriate changes in the proposed rules, will return Colorado among the top oil and gas investment destinations - as ranked by the Fraser Institute in December, Romer said.

chakrabartyg@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2976

Some rethink budget rules

Larger joint committee, more input and more time among the ideas

By John Ingold
The Denver Post

Article Last Updated: 04/14/2008 12:00:49 AM MDT

Bills may propose changes this year, but JBC members say lawmakers will get plenty of chances to have their say.

The annual roller derby that is the state budget's trip through the legislature is over for the year.

Both chambers late last week gave final approval to the budget, sending it to Gov. Bill Ritter for his signature.

And after three weeks of party strategy meetings, lengthy and combustible floor fights over 151 proposed amendments, pounding-on- the-lectern rhetoric and general partisan fisticuffs, here is what the legislature has to show for it: $2.4 million shuffled around in the budget from where it had been originally.

In a $17.6 billion budget, that shuffled money is a mere .014 percent. A number of lawmakers wonder whether there is a better way.

"I think it's time we upgrade the budget, Colorado budget 2.0," said Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma. ". . . When you're talking about spending $18 billion, there is no reason 100 legislators shouldn't be able to amend, vote and debate the budget in a more open manner."

Gardner is among a handful of legislators who say they intend to introduce before the end of the session proposed rule changes to how Colorado crafts its budget. A number of lawmakers plan to meet over the summer to talk about bigger changes.

"Every year when we get to this point, we hear these things where some of the other 94 members seem to think it's an easy process," said Sen. John Morse, a Colorado Springs Democrat who is one of the six members of the legislature's Joint Budget Committee. ". . . It's not as easy as you think."

The Joint Budget Committee, or JBC, spends months putting together the budget, which then hits the floor of either the House or Senate in March. Within two weeks, both chambers need to have argued, amended and passed the budget.

Because the House and the Senate have to pass the same version of the bill, a conference committee — made up of the JBC members — is appointed to resolve differences. In conference committee, the JBC members often take off amendments, then send it back for final approval.

This year, the House passed four amendments, and the Senate added 12 more, though some of those took off House amendments. By the time the budget emerged from the conference committee, only six of the amendments remained.

Gardner suggests expanding the JBC to 10 members, as well as switching to biennial budgeting. Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, said she intends to introduce a rule change that would give the legislature more time to review and debate the budget.

Curry is also looking at allowing other legislative committees to review portions of the budget and make advisory votes on it. Gardner and Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon, D-Denver, are considering similar ideas.

"I don't think the process is set up to allow for up-front engagement that is more meaningful than trying to put amendments on after decisions have been made," Curry said.

JBC members, though, said lawmakers have the opportunity to attend any of their meetings, all of which are public, and make suggestions.

JBC member Sen. Steve Johnson, R-Larimer County, said some tension around the process will likely always exist.

"It is the one bill we have to pass," he said. "No one gets everything they like."

John Ingold: 303-954-1068 or jingold@denverpost.com

Every member of the legislature is welcome to join every JBC budget briefing and hearing, ask questions, and participate in the debate. Every member of the legislature can amend the budget.

When the JBC holds hearings on departments, members of the committees that oversee those departments can get paid a per diem for attending.

After the briefings and hearings, the JBC visits every committee to brief the members on the budget.

When the JBC wants to adjust the budget in a way that requires a change in law, the members have to carry a bill that goes through the usual committees. That, by the way, can be agonizing. A committee that's concerned with just one portion of the budget can fight to prevent budget cuts without worrying about balancing the overall budget.

Colorado's budget is limited. There are a lot of good ideas that can't get money. It's always disappointing when something you think is important can't get funded. It happens at least as much to members of the JBC as it does to any other legislator. They hear about every item that needs money and hear a lot of good arguments in favor of them.

Some members choose not to participate in the budget process, and some argue for cutting the budget without knowing what's in it. Then when something they want doesn't get funded, or gets cut, they howl and demand changes to the process. But changing the process won't make any more money available and it won't guarantee that every legislator will get the money he or she wants for his or her district.

Lawmakers boost early childhood education

By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU

DENVER - Changes lawmakers made last year in school financing allowed this year's Legislature to increase funding for preschool and daylong kindergarten programs, according to the state lawmakers who annually carry the bill.

Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder and a member of the Joint Budget Committee, said last year's freeze on property tax mill levies is allowing the Legislature to do something it's never been able to do before in a large way - fund early childhood dev- elopment.

"I think we're actually making a significant change that will help students learn better," Pommer said. "Over the years, we've done all this stuff that was supposed to help reduce the (achievement) gap to try to help students learn better, and most of it has been a bunch of nonsense."

As a result, the annual School Finance Act not only includes a $216 million increase in the aid the state sends directly to schools next year, from $3.1 billion in this year's budget, but it also will be able to add another $49 million to pay for more preschool and all-day kindergarten programs, Pommer said.

"The one thing that everybody involved in education knows is that some kids don't show up for first grade ready to learn," he said. "The way you get around that is by making sure that kids who need it have access to high-quality preschool and full-day kindergarten."

The bill, which cleared the House Education Committee on Thursday and heads to the House Appropriations Committee next week, also includes:

Increasing the statewide base per-pupil funding by 2.2 percent to match inflation, plus 1 percent as required by Amendment 23 approved by voters in 2000.

Provides additional funding for kindergarten, holding harmless those school districts that don't choose to implement all-day programs, to add 22,000 more students. Creates a grant program to build or renovate school buildings that want to add full-day kindergarten classroom space.

Adds $2 million in grants to special education programs.

Increases the number of preschool slots statewide by 300, bringing the total to 20,160.

Pommer said that while the increase in kindergarten money isn't enough to offer the class to all children, it does help school districts increase the number of at-risk students in the program.

"We're letting districts decide how they want to use it," he said. "Some districts are going to offer it in schools where they feel like there's a particular need, some are going to use it to reduce the tuition in their existing programs, and others will probably come up with ideas we haven't thought of."

Pommer said the long-term goal is to increase funding to early education programs by $100 million over the next six years.

Sen. Sue Windels, D-Arvada and a retired kindergarten teacher, said focusing on early childhood education is the best way to address the state's high dropout rate, close the so-called achievement gap between white students and minorities and get more students into college .

She said the facts are clear that teaching children early in life helps them learn more as they get older.

"The solution is in preschool and in full-day kindergarten," said Windels, chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee. "I've tried every year to add a few more preschool slots for at-risk kids . . . and it is an exciting day, an exciting year that we are finally going to be able to offer preschool (and kindergarten) to every at-risk child who wants to go."

Philosophical split obvious in partisan budget feud

By Alan Gathright, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Friday, April 4, 2008

The debate that led up to Senate approval of the $17.6 billion state budget Thursday revolved around a philosophical split between Republicans and Democrats on government spending.

A philosophical split? Or petty Dick Wadhams politics? I'm sitting in the Appropriations Committee right now where Republicans have sponsored bills spending more than $3 million. Just one morning. The fact is they've been voting to spend money all year, just as always. I've supported some of the bills and opposed others, just as always.

When the Republicans were in charge, they spent up to the 6% limit. There's no philosophical split, just politics.

Republicans called it "reckless" excess to add 1,334 state workers while the economy is tanking.

They were still fuming at the governor's office and majority Democrats for killing a "meager" $30 million "rainy day" fund proposal.

Of course they knew we were already working, with them, to build a rainy day fund with far more money in it -- more than $150 million.

"It's like adding 1,300 new state workers to the deck of the Titanic and we're heading for an iceberg and we're telling them to hold on as we turn up the steam," said Sen. Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs.

"But maybe we can offer them slushies after we hit," he added.

Democrats called it a frugal, smart budget that "invested" in vital programs - top-notch universities to crank out world- class workers and solar-power subsidies to spur the "new energy economy." Such spending, they said, will help Colorado power through choppy economic waters.

Democrats said the state still has a $283 million emergency reserve - four percent of the general fund, which both parties have tried to increase for years.

Republicans questioned why Democrats could not simply "reduce" the growth of spending below the maximum 6 percent limit.

We could have killed all if the bills they're sponsoring that spend money, but they would have complained about that too.

GOP lawmakers said Dems want to take the easy way out - tapping billions from the anticipated windfall from the state's oil-and-gas boom.

The Republicans have been working with us on that without complaining. And they've been insisting that some of the windfall get spent in their districts rather than go into the rainy day fund. Even if the Republicans didn't bring that up, the reporter could have mentioned it.

Senators voted 21-14, with only one Republican joining majority Democrats, to pass the spending plan.

When Democrats were in the minority, we voted for the budget even when he hated some of the things in it. Those budgets have a lot of cuts to important services because the Republicans had recklessly cut taxes. We could have all voted "no" and let the Republicans take all of the criticism for those cuts, but we chose to work with them and share the responsibility.

A conference committee will iron out differences between House and Senate versions before the bill goes to the governor.