For those who don’t regularly follow Olympia, some background may help. The length of legislative sessions alternate annually between 60 and 90 days. Even-year (e.g. 2012) sessions are 60 days long, and in odd years (2013) they are 90 days. Extra sessions are estimated to cost the state an additional $18,000 per day, giving a 30-day session a price tag well in excess of a half-million dollars. For example in 2012, the legislature was given 60 days to construct and agree upon a budget. It failed to do so in the allotted time and required two additional sessions totaling 31 days at a cost of nearly $560,000 to taxpayers. This year, the legislature had 90 days to create a budget and has again failed to deliver. It will go into extra session again starting May 13^th.

Some may question the audacity of pinning responsibility on Democrats, as one might assume an inability to reach a budget must be the result of gridlock between both parties. Andrew Garber wrote an article in the Sunday edition of the Seattle Times with this storyline. But history proves the writer’s analysis thin. In 2010, 2011 and 2012, the Democratic Party controlled the governor’s mansion, the senate and the house by such comfortable margins, that there could be no formidable opposition on any legislation mounted from Republicans. In those three years combined, the legislature spent a total of 92 days in extra session, with an additional cost to voters of $1.7M. Sensing the voter’s lack of patience with this absurdity in 2012, three courageous Democrats finally acted in a bi-partisan manner with Republicans to pass a budget and close-out the session. They were rewarded for their solution-oriented thinking with censure from the Democrats and were nicknamed the Road Kill Caucus.

Reasonable people will disagree on the size and scope of government. But what is not debatable is the precondition of a balanced budget for the existence of state-level government programs and services. This dictates that the operating budget (funding education with the first dollars), then safety and infrastructure should be addressed as the highest priorities. In 2002, Republicans and Democrats cooperated in a bipartisan fashion on the Priorities of Government Budget model without a special session.

Today, I read a representative’s Facebook post which placed a bill on reproductive rights as a priority on par with funding education in the extra session. We can do better than this sort of undisciplined leadership, and we must. The leadership shown by Governor Gary Locke and Senator Dino Rossi in 2002 serves as proof that government can be effective and efficient. The 2012 Road Kill Caucus demonstrated that the differences between earnest leaders of different ideologies can be bridged for the common good. The legislature needs to be liberated of people that do not take leadership seriously and lack the motivation to solve problems outside of a partisan context. They should be replaced with leaders with the resolve to honestly serve the voters.

On February 28^th, the Washington State Supreme Court announced a ruling that struck down the voter-approved Initiative 1185, which required a two-thirds majority to raise legislative taxes.

This decision came after the League of Education Voters (LEV), the Washington Education Association (WEA) and House Democrats along with a few activists, sued taxpayers to have the initiative declared unconstitutional. This lawsuit, initiated against overwhelming statewide voter approval, proves the need for citizens to hold current legislators accountable and to elect those in the future who will constitutionally enshrine the two-thirds threshold for raising taxes.

Over the past 20 years, whenever Washington voters were presented with the opportunity to impose a limit, they approved supermajority measures for raising taxes. In some convoluted way the initiative process has thus become a justification for a majority of voters to elect candidates who share their social views, but have contempt for Washington’s fiscal conservatism.

Because so much is at stake in our state, leadership from both parties is necessary for sustainable budgets. We must revitalize our democratic traditions in order to elect representatives that respect the will of the voters and who will form budgets in a collaborative manner. Voters not only want their wishes respected, they have demonstrated that they want the ideals of both parties to be included in the budget creation process.

Some pundits have erroneously argued that an amendment will subject budgeting to a tyranny of the minority. Don’t be fooled. It is the invented concern of the anti-democratic crowd in power who don’t share voter’s fiscal views. This distrust of voters is not just limited to the electorate’s stance on financial priorities. It is also visible during the campaign season, when voters select their representatives.

In 2012, I was a first-time candidate for a state Senate, running on a platform of fiscal restraint in Olympia and economic prosperity for all Washington. Although I ran as a Republican, the opposition to my candidacy originated from both parties because I challenged an incumbent. In the process of the election campaign, my youthful indiscretions from 20 years ago turned into a smear, a near pogrom, by my opponent’s supporters. The effort went so far that a political reporter sympathetic to my opponent used the platform of his major wire service to write highly embellished, negative articles that were further exploited in direct mailings and on the Internet.

Political operatives who have mastered the art of the “big lie” are actively involved in our elections. Their contempt is not limited against the opposing candidates as it is against the voters themselves. Campaign insiders don’t focus on issues. Apparently, in their view, voters can’t be trusted to make the right choices. In America’s politics, the tendency among candidates and interest groups is to pursue electoral victory above all else. In fact they treat politics as war. This destructive attitude runs counter to our basic democratic values and ultimately inhibits our state government’s ability to reach common-sense solutions that capture the best thinking of both parties.

Now, it’s up to us. Voters must act over the next few election cycles to demand that their candidates for the legislature support the concept that a supermajority is needed to raise taxes. If they don’t follow the public will, then we should thank them for their services and elect new leaders who do.

More important than many realize, if Washington is to move from unsustainable spending patterns to a budget that is predictable, we must engage the clutch that allows spending to slow to match natural revenue growth.

This is the second in two-part series on education priorities by Washington State 5th District Senate Candidate, Brad Toft. You can read part 1 HERE. This article does NOT express the views of Living Snoqualmie, which has NOT endorsed any candidates in this election. Brad’s opponent, Mark Mullet, will share his education priorities on Living Snoqualmie tomorrow.

Earlier this week, I called for the state teachers union to abandon its attack on those who call for school reform. I suggested they instead come to the table ready work on a plan that will bring us world-class schools. Of course, I was immediately attacked by the WEA for doing so. While it may seem a long shot here in Washington, I look to other states and see that accord on education is possible. Assuming that it is, I propose three significant reforms.

Funding, In The Classroom

The Washington Supreme Court’s McCleary decision looms over the legislature requiring it to adequately fund education by 2018. In reading our state constitution, it is a wonder that a Supreme Court decision was needed to clearly identify the state’s paramount duty. Fortunately, the process to accomplish this goal exists in the Priorities of Government Budget model. We just need to start using it. Those in power have given us a false choice by starving education funding in favor of social services. Later, they return to say we need more money for our kids. The real funding discussion should be concentrated around funding of social services, not education. It is little wonder that people across the political spectrum think Olympia doesn’t have a fiscally responsible bone in its body.

For the record, I believe the first dollars in the budget should go to educating our children. This is a position in contrast with my opponent. He says we must raise taxes and reform healthcare to fund education (you read that right). Funding the whole system is one thing. The state also needs to reward schools that deliver the most money to the classroom. When I served on the board of Habitat for Humanity of East King County, we held ourselves to a standard that 75 cents of every dollar raised needed to go to building houses for our partner families. This kept us focused on the mission and credible with our donors. The legislature should conduct the same focus on public education. It should reward schools that send more money to the classrooms. We can develop the guidelines for what qualifies, and we can establish a target of 70 cents of every dollar. That should start things in the right direction.

Flexible & Responsive

Charter schools are now illegal in the state of Washington. Someone in the 5th District recently assailed me for my support of charter schools. His rationale was that they are a failed experiment. It appears his argument, however, was based on talking points straight from the WEA weekly newsletter. Charter schools may be a failure when it comes to unionizing, but not with educating kids.

It’s true; there are examples of success and failure of charter schools around the country. However, it is false to claim that they are all a failed experiment. Charter schools are legal in 41 states, are extremely popular with parents, and are supported by President Obama. The waiting lists for charter schools would fill an additional 600 schools nationwide. Stanford University’s 2009 study shows that “for students that are low income, charter schools had a larger and more positive effect than for similar students in traditional public schools. English Language Learner students also reported significantly better gains in charter schools.”

In Washington State, no solution should be off the table when it comes to educating our kids. Administrators and educators alike are calling for more flexibility in the system that allows for decisions concerning best practices to be made closer to the student. We need to offer what students and parents want.

Develop Our Teachers

I believe that teachers and the quality of instruction make the biggest difference. Great teachers energize the learning environment. So, we need to invest in them. Some of the dialogue around teacher evaluation is troubling because there are those who see it simply as a tool to remove under-performing teachers. I believe teacher evaluations have much more to offer. The purpose of any evaluation in any organization is to develop the workforce, not fire them. Firing is expensive in many ways. The evaluation process may show that some personnel are not a good fit, and the teacher may need to move on. But our system should be promoting career development and implementing proven criteria to rigorously evaluate teacher effectiveness, so that we can advance our talent field. These evaluations should include self, peer and supervisor reviews for greater accountability. Improvement in overall student achievement scores should be considered a component of a teacher’s evaluation.

We can do better and we must. Our children deserve the best possible education we can give them. I believe that these reforms will help.

Thanks for reading,

Brad

As the November 6th general election draws near, I thought readers might like a chance to see where some local candidates stand on the issue of education. Education has always been a topic of interest on Living Snoqualmie, as well as in the Snoqualmie Valley.

Part 1 of a 2 Part Series on Public Education in Washington, by Brad Toft

If we were to start with a blank sheet of paper and draft a plan for a world-class public education system, it’s hard to make the argument that we would construct the school system that exists in Washington State. During this political season, the topic of schools is hotter than ever. Valid arguments are being made for ways to improve the system. Make no mistake, new ideas should be vetted and debated. Something must be done to change the environment in which these discussions are happening.

The Bully On The Playground
There is an obstacle embedded within public education that will not allow for serious discussions to take place. It wasn’t always this way. But if this problem is left unaddressed, necessary school reforms at the state level will not happen. There is a bully on the playground that attacks anyone who calls for school reform. After 30 years of accumulating power, the teachers union has become an obstruction against progress. What’s more, the leadership in the legislature has lost its bearings, showing contempt for the taxpayers who fund the system.

In a new public education system, children and their parents should be the paramount stakeholders. I believe that great teachers make the biggest difference in the quality of a child’s education, which is why the system should be designed to attract the best and brightest professionals. To be clear, however, the end result by which our schools should be measured is children completing their education. They must receive an education that equips them for jobs and prepares them for higher learning. Career satisfaction for teachers should be a major objective, without confusing it as the primary goal of the system. Union leadership has lost its bearings. They show more interest in accumulating power against taxpayers, rather than being a voice for children.

I do not believe a candidate can be credible in suggesting reforms for our schools without first acknowledge the need to stand up to the bullies on the playground.

In part 2 of the series I will identify reforms at the state level that should be priorities for improving our public schools.

Thanks for reading,

Brad

SEATTLE (AP) — Gov. Chris Gregoire tried to sell her idea for a temporary sales tax increase to replace budget cuts to a classroom of college students on Tuesday, but only about half of the students raised their hands to say they would vote for the plan to bring in an estimated $494 million through 2013.

Gregoire said she considered 185 different revenue options and a slew of budget cuts before picking the half-cent tax as part of her plan to deal with a projected deficit of $1.4 billion.

If voters approve the sales tax increase, the governor said she could take off the table ideas like cutting the school year by four days, taking $160.1 million away from higher education and reducing levy equalization payments to property-poor districts by $151.9 million.

Her budget proposal includes a total of $1.7 billion in cuts — roughly one-quarter of the cuts would be in education — to leave some money in reserves for the next biennium.

One student at South Seattle Community College asked why the governor is proposing an increase to the state’s already regressive tax system, where the poor pay more than their share for state services, instead of pushing for an income tax. She replied that the voters have spoken: They rejected a proposed income tax on the wealthiest Washington residents last year.

Although some lawmakers and citizen activists have already said they oppose any kind of tax increase, Gregoire said she didn’t think anyone would prefer the alternatives, including cutting medical services for 55,000 low-income residents or making the state’s poorest school districts make do with less money from levy equalization.

“I don’t think there is a Republican or a Democrat who believes we should cut levy equalization,” she said, of the program that attempts to even out the way education levy dollars are distributed. Most of the state’s school districts get some levy equalization money.

Gregoire said she changed her mind on one part of her education proposal during the past few weeks after talking to school officials.

“Those involved in K-12 said we’d rather have you cut days off school than increase class sizes,” she said, adding that in her opinion the school year should be longer, not shorter.

Her tax increase idea got a warm reception from people involved in education.

The president of the state’s largest teacher’s union says she appreciates that the governor has raised the issue of revenue.

“We think we need to put all the revenue options on the table,” said Washington Education Association President Mary Lindquist. “I don’t think we can afford any more cuts at this point.”

She noted the state doesn’t have the money it spent three years ago on education and state courts have already decided that financial commitment to schools was not adequate, referring to the school funding lawsuit now before the Washington Supreme Court.

Lindquist also brought up the Occupy Wall Street movement and argued that some people and corporations aren’t paying their fair share to support the services that government provides.

The Washington state PTA also opposes more cuts to education, and its leaders were particularly troubled by the proposal to cut school days, saying that idea will especially hurt low income and struggling students.

State PTA President Novella Fraser of Federal Way said “too many children will miss additional days of nutritional meals, and struggling students will miss additional opportunities to catch up with their classmates.”

The PTA supports raising taxes and Fraser said they would be willing to advocate for that idea.

Individual parents also say they’ve had enough of state cuts to education and support more tax money for education.

“There’s a big hole in the budget and education is the biggest target,” said Mike Hayashi of Kent, who has a son in the Federal Way School District. “Anything that fills the hole for education is what I consider the best way for the future of the state.”

Hayashi said most people won’t see the impact of these cuts right away, but they will see them eventually, when companies have trouble finding Washington residents with the skills they need in their employees.

Western Washington University President Bruce Shepard said he and his team would be “fighting like the dickens” to make sure a balanced approach — a combination of cuts and new revenue — prevail in Olympia. He said his job is to make sure everyone understands the consequences of another $7 million cut in state support for Western.

Included on a list sent to the university community of potential impacts were: eliminating colleges, cutting academic programs, replacing Washington students with more out-of-state students, eliminating classes and replacing regular faculty with part-time teachers.

Shepard said the biggest concern he hears from parents is that students get a quality education and graduate on time.

On average, if every student takes an extra quarter to graduate, the total bill for the parents of the university’s 12,500 full-time students would be $75 million, Shepard said.

State lawmakers return to Olympia on Nov. 28 for a special legislative session to consider Gregoire’s proposal and to work on the projected deficit before they meet for their regular session in January.

Brad Toft is a longtime Eastside businessman and owns Clearwater Mortgage Bankers.

Sammamish Patch welcomes Brad Toft, a longtime Eastside businessman and currently the owner of a retail mortgage firm, Clearwater Mortgage Bankers.

For the past three years Brad has authored Clearwater Mortgage Banker’s blog, the WeeklyWire and he has been a contributing writer to Issues and Answers, a publication of the Washington Banker’s Association. He spent four years on the Board of Directors of Habitat for Humanity of East King County and is currently a board member of the Snoqualmie Valley Chamber of Commerce.

Brad lives in Snoqualmie with his family where he has been a resident for nearly 10 years. He is a candidate for the 5th District Senate seat in the 2012 election.

Brad plans to blog about the economy and real estate finance for Sammamish Patch. You can read his first post here.

(Visit Brad’s blog homepage at The Patch.)

Republican Toft has said he plans to seek the 5th District state Senate seat held by Cheryl Pflug (R-Maple Valley).

Brad Toft has filed with the Washington State Public Disclosure to run for the 5th District Senate seat in 2012 as a Republican, he said in a press release. Currently, Cheryl Pflug (R-Maple Valley) holds the 5th District State Senate seat.

Toft is a Pacific Northwest native and has made his home with his family in the city of Snoqualmie for nearly a decade. He has a career spanning 20 years in the financial services sector during which time he led a joint venture of Fortune 500 firms with $300 million in annual sales.

For the past five years Toft has been a small business owner in east King County.

In the relsease, Toft cites his involvement in the community including serving on the boards of directors for Habitat for Humanity of East King County, Rotary of Snoqualmie Valley and the Snoqualmie Ridge Residential Owners Association. He is the founder and chairman of the Youth Leadership Initiative, a program in partnership with the Snoqualmie Valley School district that recognizes the character and actions of local students.

Over the last two years Toft has volunteered as the “Voice of the Wildcats” for varsity sports at Mount Si High School. He says in the release that his campaign will focus on public education, the state budget, and the economy with a specific focus on small business and jobs.

Brad Toft, a Snoqualmie businessman, will challenge incumbent State Senator Cheryl Pflug for a fifth district Senate seat in the 2012 general election. Toft committed to the race at an Oct. 21 tourism conference in Snoqualmie, and plans a formal announcement Thursday, Nov. 10.

Toft is a managing partner of Clearwater Mortgage Partners in Belleveue, and has lived in Snoqualmie for nearly 10 years. He’s worked in financial services for 20 years, and served on the boards of Habitat for Humanity of East King County, Rotary of Snoqualmie Valley and the Snoqualmie Ridge Residential Owners Association. He’s also been the volunteer “Voice of the Wildcats” for the past two years for Mount Si High School varsity sports.

Toft said in a press release that he plans to focus his campaign on public education, the state budget, and the economy with specific attention for small business and jobs. He is running as a Republican.

Incumbent Senator Cheryl Pflug, also a Republican, was unaware that Toft had declared his candidacy. She said in a phone conversation Oct. 26 that she did plan to run for her seat again in 2012.

With a legislative special session coming up Nov. 28, and her role on the budget committee responsible for addressing the nearly $2 billion shortfall in projected revenues, Pflug said she was not focused on 2012 election issues just yet. She said she sent out a fund-raising e-mail message, “but I think we have some important work to do before then.”

During the special session, Pflug also hopes to bring up a Medicaid fraud bill that didn’t make it through the last special session, saying it would save the state “tens of millions of dollars in fraud recovery… . It won’t make up the difference, but those are the kinds of holes we need to plug.”

Pflug has served in the State Senate for the 5th District since 2004. She was a State Representative for the District from 1999 to 2004.