logo
Bills to help Oregon schools fund years of summer learning await governor's signature

Bills to help Oregon schools fund years of summer learning await governor's signature

Yahoo17-04-2025

Students are taught how to sound out letters during a phonics lesson at Ferguson Elementary School in Klamath Falls on April 7, 2023. (Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle)
Oregon schools will soon have something they've never had before: more than a year to plan for summer school with the promise of consistent funding from the state Legislature. But it comes with one condition: The money should be spent on programs that get students reading and writing at grade level.
On Thursday the Senate passed two bills nearly unanimously — House Bill 5047, which appropriates $35 million for summer learning grants for 2025, $35 million for 2026, and $12 million for June of 2027 — and House Bill 2007, establishing which programs qualify for the summer grants. Both bills passed the Oregon House unanimously on April 9 and now await Gov. Tina Kotek's signature.
Kotek indicated at a news conference Tuesday she would sign the bills and said the unanimous votes to pass both in the House earlier in the month were highlights of the session for her so far.
'I'm very appreciative of legislative leaders for showing their commitment to that issue. I think it's really important for our students to have access to summer learning programs,' she said.
The $35 million available to schools this summer is welcome, but untimely, for many school administrators. Most smaller school districts are wrapping up planning for summer programs by April, and most larger districts start planning as early as October. Last year, schools didn't learn until March whether they'd receive a portion of $30 million in summer grants. For some, the money came too late to expand their offerings.
But knowing schools have the money next year, and in years ahead, is a game changer, bill advocates said. House Bill 5047 also makes clear that the funding is intended to be ongoing at $70 million per biennium, from a fund housed in the Treasury rather than from the state's general fund, to help support three months of summer learning programs every year in perpetuity.
'We're thrilled the days of last minute investment and planning for summer learning are finally over,' said Anna Higgins, policy director for the education nonprofit Foundations for a Better Oregon.
House Bill 2007 underwent a number of amendments over the last few months after school leaders and education advocacy groups expressed concern that granting money only for literacy-specific, at-school programs was too narrow.
It's since been expanded, to allow schools to fund summer programs that aid in credit recovery, use 'evidence-based' curriculum to teach language arts as well as math and science, and to allow schools to partner with community-based organizations and colleges to offer programs. It was also changed to make room for summer literacy programs that include 'enrichment activities' outside of the classroom, as long as they improve student academic outcomes.
The Oregon Department of Education, which will distribute the grants, is required to prioritize schools with the lowest rates of reading proficiency when awarding funds. In the future, the bill allows the agency to recommend other academic areas to target supper learning grants as needed.
School administrators and education groups, such as Foundations for a Better Oregon, who advocated in public hearings that the bill be expanded to include more community organizations, activities, and academic focus areas, said they were pleased with the amended bill.
'While there's more work to do to eliminate barriers and actually incentivize school-community partnerships, which are critical to reaching academic goals for historically underserved students, this bill marks an important milestone for expanding access to out-of-school learning for Oregon's kids,' Higgins said.
For the last few years, school administrators have asked the Legislature repeatedly to dedicate funding for summer school, and to do so with consistency so they can plan ahead. Instead, the Legislature has repeatedly punted the decision to the end of sessions, leaving schools with notice that they can apply for some additional state funding weeks before programs are due to begin.
In the aftermath of COVID and school closures, the need for summer learning programs to help students catch up gained urgency in the Legislature. Former Sens. Peter Courtney and Michael Dembrow, Democrats from Salem and Portland, respectively, even proposed investing in robust summer learning programs could be a runway for eventually introducing year-round school.
In 2021, schools received more than $200 million, and in 2022 they were allocated $150 million. But in 2023, the Legislature did not send schools any additional summer school money, and instead hoped they would spend the last of their federal COVID-relief dollars. Schools cut programs and some nonprofits stopped offering summer programs altogether.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump aides want Texas to redraw its congressional maps to boost the GOP. What would that mean?
Trump aides want Texas to redraw its congressional maps to boost the GOP. What would that mean?

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Trump aides want Texas to redraw its congressional maps to boost the GOP. What would that mean?

This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Texas' free newsletters here. Republicans representing Texas in Congress are considering this week whether to push their state Legislature to take the unusual step of redrawing district lines to shore up the GOP's advantage in the U.S. House. But the contours of the plan, including whether Gov. Greg Abbott would call a special session of the Legislature to redraw the maps, remain largely uncertain. The idea is being driven by President Donald Trump's political advisers, who want to draw up new maps that would give Republicans a better chance to flip seats currently held by Democrats, according to two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. That proposal, which would involve shifting GOP voters from safely red districts into neighboring blue ones, is aimed at safeguarding Republicans' thin majority in Congress, where they control the lower chamber, 220-212. The redistricting proposal, and the Trump team's role in pushing it, was first reported by The New York Times Monday. Without a Republican majority in Congress, Trump's legislative agenda would likely stall, and the president could face investigations from newly empowered Democratic committee chairs intent on scrutinizing the White House. Here's what we know about the plan so far: On Capitol Hill, members of the Texas GOP delegation huddled Monday night to discuss the prospect of reshaping their districts. Most of the 25-member group expressed reluctance about the idea, citing concerns about jeopardizing their districts in next year's midterms if the new maps overextended the GOP's advantage, according to the two GOP aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private deliberations. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Lubbock, was skeptical of the idea. 'We just recently worked on the new maps,' Arrington told The Texas Tribune. To reopen the process, he said, 'there'd have to be a significant benefit to our state.' The delegation has yet to be presented with mockups of new maps, two aides said. Each state's political maps must be redrawn once a decade, after each round of the U.S. census, to account for population growth and ensure every congressional and legislative district has roughly the same number of people. Texas lawmakers last overhauled their district lines in 2021. There's no federal law that prohibits states from redrawing district maps midcycle, said Justin Levitt, an election law professor at Loyola Marymount University and a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice's civil rights division. Laws around the timing to redraw congressional and state district maps vary by state. In Texas, the state constitution doesn't specify timing, so the redrawing of maps is left to the discretion of the governor and the Legislature. Lawmakers gaveled out of their 140-day regular session last week, meaning they would need to be called back for a special session to change the state's political maps. Abbott has the sole authority to order overtime sessions and decide what lawmakers are allowed to consider. A trial is underway in El Paso in a long-running challenge to the state legislative and congressional district maps Texas drew after the 2020 U.S. Census. If Texas redraws its congressional maps, state officials would then ask the court to toss the claims challenging those districts 'that no longer exist,' Levitt said. The portion of the case over the state legislative district maps would continue. If the judge agrees, then both parties would have to file new legal claims for the updated maps. It isn't clear how much maps could change, but voters could find themselves in new districts, and Levitt said redrawing the lines in the middle of the redistricting cycle is a bad idea. 'If the people of Texas think that their representatives have done a bad job, then when the [district] lines change, they're not voting on those representatives anymore,' Levitt said. 'New people are voting on those representatives.' The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, Democrats' national arm for contesting state GOP mapmaking, said the proposal to expand Republicans' stronghold in Texas was 'yet another example of Trump trying to suppress votes in order to hold onto power.' 'Texas's congressional map is already being sued for violating the Voting Rights Act because it diminishes the voting power of the state's fast-growing Latino population,' John Bisognano, president of the NDRC said. 'To draw an even more extreme gerrymander would only assure that the barrage of legal challenges against Texas will continue.' When Republicans in charge of the Legislature redrew the district lines after the 2020 census, they focused on reinforcing their political support in districts already controlled by the GOP. This redistricting proposal would likely take a different approach. As things stand, Republicans hold 25 of the state's 38 congressional seats. Democrats hold 12 seats and are expected to regain control of Texas' one vacant seat in a special election this fall. Most of Texas' GOP-controlled districts lean heavily Republican: In last year's election, 24 of those 25 seats were carried by a Republican victor who received at least 60% of the vote or ran unopposed. The exception was U.S. Rep. Monica De La Cruz, R-Edinburg, who captured 57% of the vote and won by a comfortable 14-point margin. With little competition to speak of, The Times reported, Trump's political advisers believe at least some of those districts could bear the loss of GOP voters who would be reshuffled into neighboring, Democratic-held districts — giving Republican hopefuls a better chance to flip those seats from blue to red. The party in control of the White House frequently loses seats during midterm cycles, and Trump's team is likely looking to offset potential GOP losses in other states and improve the odds of holding on to a narrow House majority. Incumbent Republicans, though, don't love the idea of sacrificing a comfortable race in a safe district for the possibility of picking up a few seats, according to GOP aides. In 2003, after Texas Republicans initially left it up to the courts to draw new lines following the 2000 census, then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Sugar Land Republican, embarked instead on a bold course of action to consolidate GOP power in the state. He, along with his Republican allies, redrew the lines as the opening salvo to a multistate redistricting plan aimed at accumulating power for his party in states across the country. Enraged by the power play, Democrats fled the state, depriving the Texas House of the quorum it needed to function. The rebels eventually relented under threat of arrest, a rare power in the Texas Constitution used to compel absent members back to return to Austin when the Legislature is in session. The lines were then redrawn, cementing the GOP majority the delegation has enjoyed in Washington for the past two decades. However, what's at play this time is different than in the early 2000s, when Republicans had a newfound majority in the Legislature and had a number of vulnerable Democratic incumbents they could pick off. Now, Republicans have been entrenched in the majority for decades and will have to answer the question of whether there's really more to gain, said Kareem Crayton, the vice president of the Brennan Center for Justice's Washington office. 'That's the tradeoff. You can do that too much so that you actually make them so competitive that the other side wins,' Crayton said. 'That's always a danger.' Texas Republicans are planning to reconvene Thursday to continue discussing the plan, according to Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Irving, and Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Houston, who said they will attend the meeting. Members of Trump's political team are also expected to attend, according to Hunt and two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. Natalia Contreras is a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with the Texas Tribune. She's based in Corpus Christi. Contact Natalia at ncontreras@ Disclosure: New York Times has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O'Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer. Get tickets. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.

TEAMSTERS DEMAND RHODE ISLAND HOUSE PASS WORKER PROTECTION PACKAGE
TEAMSTERS DEMAND RHODE ISLAND HOUSE PASS WORKER PROTECTION PACKAGE

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

TEAMSTERS DEMAND RHODE ISLAND HOUSE PASS WORKER PROTECTION PACKAGE

Legislation is Critical for Enhancing Workplace Safety, Protecting Worker Free Speech PROVIDENCE, R.I., June 11, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Rhode Island Teamsters are urging the State House of Representatives to pass the Worker Protection Package — a group of three bills that are critical for improving occupational conditions throughout the state. The legislation includes House Bill 5047, which would protect warehouse workers from unsafe and unrealistic production quotas. House Bill 5506 would ban "captive audience meetings," where employers force workers to sit through anti-union propaganda. House Bill 5305 would establish standards to protect workers from extreme heat or cold on the job. All three bills have already passed the Senate and now await a vote in the House. "House lawmakers need to act fast to pass the Worker Protection Package and send this comprehensive trio of bills to the Governor's desk," said Matt Taibi, Teamsters Eastern Region International Vice President and Secretary-Treasurer of Teamsters Local 251. "Our state has a unique opportunity to lead the way in not just protecting workers' rights but saving lives. Let's enact these laws and set a positive example for the rest of the country." The Teamsters are advocating for similar reforms in statehouses across the country. California, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Washington have all passed legislation to protect workers from unsafe production quotas. One in four workers now live in a state that has banned mandatory attendance at captive audience meetings. California, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington all have occupational standards for extreme temperature exposure. Teamsters Local 251 represents over 6,300 workers in a wide variety of industries throughout Rhode Island and southeastern Massachusetts. For more information, go to Contact: Matt McQuaid, (771) 241-0015mmcquaid@ View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Teamsters Local 251 Sign in to access your portfolio

Big Beautiful Bill would ban regulating AI
Big Beautiful Bill would ban regulating AI

Boston Globe

time4 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

Big Beautiful Bill would ban regulating AI

How did they give away the future of American workers to tech executives? Buried in President Trump's Advertisement Iin Massachusetts, the Republicans' ban would block the State House from considering legislation that would safeguard our fundamental rights. Labor unions, led by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, and community members have come together to urge the Legislature to pass an act fostering artificial intelligence responsibility, known as the FAIR Act. Advertisement The bill would establish needed guardrails around the use of AI and similar technologies by employers and in the workplace. It would restrict the use of AI-driven worker surveillance tools, many of which are already being used, and prevent employers from relying solely on automatic decision-making systems in hiring, firing, or promotion. With workers increasingly being asked to incorporate AI into their everyday work, this legislation would also establish strong anti-retaliation protections and worker autonomy provisions. If AI tools are to be used for good, we need meaningful human oversight and worker input at every step of their implementation. Preventing states like Massachusetts from considering policy like the FAIR Act would halt community-based momentum and leave workers and their families exposed to the unchecked harms of AI. This kind of giveaway for tech billionaires is the exact opposite of what Americans want from Congress. are wary of how US companies develop and use AI. But congressional Republicans are not listening to workers. Instead, they follow Elon Musk and the other Big Tech executives who want to make Washington, D.C. the next Silicon Valley and hope you won't notice the single section in Trump's bill that lines their pockets and strips you of democracy until 2035. Advertisement Trump urged House Republicans to pass the bill with the AI ban in it. But there is one more hurdle to the president's agenda ahead — the Senate. Senators must now decide whether they will stand with the interests of workers and everyday people or the interests of Big Tech billionaires. The line between tech innovation and tech domination will be drawn not in Washington, but in the workplaces, schools, and sectors where AI transforms our lives, for good and bad. It is the job of state and local representatives to adapt to these changes and pass regulations that make sense for their communities — if only Republicans don't stifle democracy first.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store