Oregon Teachers Performance Pay, Measure 60 (2008)

Oregon Teachers Performance Pay, Measure 60 (IRR 20) was a citizen initiative filed by chief petitioners Bill Sizemore and R. Russell Walker. Sizemore referred to it as the "Kids First Act." During the period when signatures were collected on the initiative, it was officially known as Initiative 20. The measure appeared on the November 4, 2008 ballot in Oregon.

Election results

Measure 60
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		1,070,682	61.39%
Yes		673,296	38.61%

Election results via:Oregon Secretary of State

Background

The goal of the initiative was to create a new Oregon state statute (not a constitutional amendment) mandating that state teachers' classroom performance, not their seniority, determine pay raises. It would also mandate that the "most qualified" teachers be retained under employment, replacing seniority as a major consideration. "Classroom performance" and "most qualified" are not defined by the measure.

This is the second time Sizemore has placed a similar measure on the ballot.Measure 95 in 2000 was defeated by 65-35.

The official ballot title for Measure 60 was: Teacher "classroom performance", not seniority, determines pay raises; "most qualified" teachers retained, regardless of seniority.

Specific provisions in the initiative

The language of the proposed statute was:

• Section 1. Teacher pay raises and job security shall be based on job performance. (a) After the effective date of this 2008 Act, pay raises for public school teachers shall be based upon each teacher’s classroom performance and not related or connected to his or her seniority. If a school district reduces its teaching staff, the district shall retain the teachers who are most qualified to teach the specific subjects, which they will be assigned to teach. A determination as to which teacher is most qualified shall be based upon each teacher’s past classroom experience successfully teaching the specific subject(s) or class, as well his or her as academic training in the relevant subject matter.

• (b) This 2008 Act shall be called the “Kids First Act” and shall supersede any previously existing law, rule, or policy with which it conflicts. This Act shall not be implemented in a manner so as to violate or impair the obligation of any contract in existence as of the effective date of this Act, but shall govern later extensions to those contracts and new contracts entered into after the effective date of this Act.

Note: "Classroom performance" and "most qualified" are not defined in the measure.

Estimated fiscal impact

The state's Financial Estimate Committee prepares estimated fiscal impact statements for any ballot measures that will appear on the ballot. The estimate prepared by this committee for Measure 60 says:

• Measure 60 would require between $30 and $72 million in additional state and local spending in the first year.
• After the first year, it would require between $30-$60 million a year in additional state and local spending.

Supporters

Preserve Our Best Teachers was the name of the committee sponsoring the original initiative. There is no committee filed to support the ballot measure.

The Oregonian reported in September 2007 that Loren Parks was the leading contributor to Measure 60.,

Randall J. Pozdena, Ph.D., of the Cascade Policy Institute, authored a commentary that argued, "Absent serious structural reforms such as school-level competition, paying for performance in the classroom may be the best way to stimulate higher academic achievement among our K-12 public school students."

Arguments in favor of Measure 60

Notable arguments made in support of the measure included:

• Good teachers should be rewarded.
• "While money may not be the only way to attract the teachers we need, it is a useful tool and one we can readily wield."
• What's more important to our kids' education: tenure or good teaching skills?
• The proposal will "reward good teachers, weed out bad ones and improve the quality of the state's schools."

Opposition

Measure 60 was opposed by the Parents and Teachers Know Better Coalition, which described itself as "a broad coalition of parents, teachers, and school advocates who care about Oregon's students & schools." The Parents and Teachers Know Better campaign was part of the Defend Oregon coalition, which opposed all five of the ballot initiatives on the November 4 ballot that were sponsored by Sizemore.

Members of the coalition included Stand for Children, Oregon PTA, United Way of the Mid-Willamette Valley, Oregon Education Association, American Federation of Teachers-Oregon, Oregon School Employees Association, and the Human Services Coalition of Oregon, among others.

Arguments against Measure 60

Notable arguments made against Measure 60 included:

• It is "costly, ill-conceived, inflexible and potentially damaging to the children of Oregon...poorly written, vague and not based on best practices.”

• It could lead to more standardized testing and cause low-income areas to lose teachers.

• Gary Stutzman of the Hillsboro Argus wrote an editorial encouraging voters to choose "no" on the measure. Read it here.

Donors opposing Measure 60

Defend Oregon, as a committee, fought seven different ballot measures, and supported two others. Altogether, the group raised over $6 million in 2008.

Major donations to the Defend Oregon group as of October 8 included:

• $4.1 million from the Oregon Education Association.,
• $100,000 from School Employees Exercising Democracy (SEED)
• $100,000 from the AFL-CIO.
• $50,000 from Oregon AFSCME Council 75.

Newspaper endorsements

Here is how Oregon's major newspapers reacted to the measure. See also Endorsements of Oregon ballot measures.

Newspapers	Yes	No
The Oregonian		No
Medford Mail-Tribune		No
Statesman Journal		No
Bend Bulletin		No
Portland Tribune		No
Eugene Register-Guard		No
Daily Astorian		No
East Oregonian		No
Corvallis Gazette Times		No
Coos Bay The World		No
Willamette Week		No
Yamhill Valley News Register		No
Gresham Outlook		No

Petition drive history

Initiative Petition 20 was originally approved for circulation on August 30, 2006, and the signatures were turned in in July. 83,724 signatures were found to be valid of those submitted, versus a qualification threshold of 82,769.

A union-funded watchdog group asked the Oregon Secretary of State to conduct an investigation into how some of the signatures on the measure were collected. Bill Bradbury, the Secretary of State has said, ""...most all of the initiatives Oregon voters will decide this fall got there through practices that are now illegal. But those practices were legal at the time most of the signatures were submitted." A lawsuit has been filed in federal court challenging the constitutionality of the new laws governing the initiative process in Oregon.,,

See also

• Oregon 2008 ballot measures
• List of Oregon ballot measures
• 2008 ballot measures
• Campaign finance requirements for Oregon ballot measures
• Laws governing the initiative process in Oregon

Suggest a link

External links

Basic information

• 2008 General Election Measures: Voter Guide
• 2008 Election Results
• Full text of the initiative
• Certified ballot title letter from the Oregon Attorney General
• Letters received from Oregon residents during the ballot title designation period

Supporters

• Bill Sizemore's official website

Opponents

• Website for the Defend Oregon Coalition
• Website for the Parents and Teachers Know Better Coalition