Thirteen of the Senate’s 21 ruling Democrats as well as eight of the House’s majority Democrats joined all Republicans voting in both chambers on Wednesday to send the groundbreaking proposal to Gov. Bill Ritter, who endorsed it earlier this year.

“The Democratic party and the CEA usually agree on issues,” said Sen. Evie Hudak, D-Arvada, who is vice chair of the Senate Education Committee and the only one of its members to have voted against the bill. “Damage has been done, trust has been lost– how much is hard to know right now.”

The bill’s passage, which came despite concerted opposition from the 40,000-member union, also has some GOP lawmakers now wondering if the CEA’s clout as one of the perennial heavyweights of state politics may be ebbing.

Senate Bill 191 provides sweeping reforms regarding the evaluation and retention of K-12 teachers, changing the way they achieve and hold onto tenure. Among its other provisions, the bill says teachers who receive unsatisfactory ratings twice in a row could lose their tenured status and possibly their jobs. The measure meanwhile is expected to keep Colorado in the running for federal Race to the Top education dollars, awarded to states showing the most innovative education reforms, including enhancing teacher proficiency.

Its bipartisan sponsors, Democrat Michael Johnston, of Denver, and Republican Nancy Spence, of Centennial, in the Senate along with Democrat Christine Scanlan, of Dillon, and Republican Carole Murray, of Castle Rock, in the House, have deftly  handled its journey through the legislative process. They’ve had to navigate their way around the CEA, Colorado’s largest union, which bitterly opposed the bill with a PR blitz and a lobbying campaign that has mustered hundreds of teachers at a time at the State Capitol.

Johnston, who downplays talk of a wedge between his party and the union, says he knew he would be stepping into controversy when he first approached the CEA last December with his outline for tenure reform, proposing sweeping change on a priority the CEA views as non-negotiable—protection of teacher tenure.

“These are big changes and big changes are always hard,” said Johnston. “My negotiations with the CEA have been very warm and they’ve been very honest and up front. I think from the outside it has looked a lot more contentious than it was from the inside.”

Republicans were more blunt.

“Tenure has been a bottom line issue for teachers unions forever,” said Spence, a veteran sponsor of wide-ranging education-reform proposals in both chambers and under both Democratic and Republican legislative majorities. “The CEA is nothing but a labor union—let’s admit that.  Their interest is in protecting their membership.”

Spence, who has locked horns with the CEA for years, said she believes that the passage of bipartisan sanctioned tenure reform will have an effect on the unions’s longstanding relationship with the Democratic party.

“This bill is such a threat to the core of what CEA stands for.  I’m sure this has been a humiliation to the folks at CEA … in a Democratic-led legislature with a Democratic governor, to lose an issue that represents their heart and soul,” said Spence.  “I think this bill transcends CEA power.”

Hudak said she finds it odd that the reform is happening under Democratic leadership.

“When the Republicans had control of the House, Senate and governor’s office they didn’t try and change tenure,” said Hudak.  “If the Republicans didn’t want to take it on I can’t see why the Democrats would be willing to do that and jeopardize our best friends, the CEA.”

Murray, a former teacher and wife of a public school principal, said that she believes that the Democratic lawmakers who support the measure are doing so because of the federal Race to the Top dollars that may become available with passage of SB191 and that the Democratic holdouts on the bill are staunch union supporters.

“The strongest advocates for the CEA are the legislators who are former teachers and members of the Democratic caucus that are pro-union,” said Murray. “I also think that Race to the Top put this issue over the top.”

Because the measure has the support of the Colorado Department of Education and groups such as the Colorado Association of School Executives, Murray said she believes it’s just a matter of time before the CEA will be forced to recognize that it will not be able to have as much sway over the Democratic party.

“It’s just one of those things whose time has come,” said Murray.

Johnston counters that he is optimistic about the future relationship with Democratic lawmakers and the CEA despite the bruising that has occurred.

“It’s a disagreement that will take some collaboration and healing,” he said. “I think what’s going to happen is that we’re all going to realize that we disagreed on this issue but on all the big issues that are coming we’re going to be absolute partners.”

Senate Bill 191 has pitted teachers against teachers while also straining relationships between historical allies over the bill’s overhaul of teacher and administrator evaluations.

The House Education Committee heard testimony on SB 191 for well over 10 hours, with raw emotions rising to the surface at times. The bipartisan measure, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Christine Scanlan of  Dillon and Republican Rep. Carole Murray of Castle Rock in the House and Sen. Michael Johnston, D-Denver, and Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial, in the Senate, has sent shock waves through the education community with its sweeping reform of how teachers are evaluated for retention.

Proponents say the measure is needed in part to keep Colorado in the running for federal Race to the Top education dollars. The funding is awarded to states showing the most innovative education reforms, including enhancing teacher proficiency.

Testimony began with two different teacher unions—one supporting and the other opposing the measure. The American Federation of Teachers said it welcomed the reforms while the Colorado Education Association, longtime allies with many Democratic lawmakers, rejected the reforms.

“The CEA rejects reform that is being done to teachers and not with them,” said CEA President Beverly Ingle.

Democratic chairman Rep. Michael Merrifield, of Colorado Springs, and several other Democratic panel members were solid in their support of the CEA’s position and expressed that solidarity throughout the evening.

“The angst doesn’t need to be here,” said Merrifield. “We have a bill here that says we’re going to get this done come hell or high water.”

Meanwhile, the Colorado Association of School Boards, the Colorado Association of School Executives, and the Department of Education all threw their support behind the measure, making for terse exchanges with the Democratic panel members opposing SB191.

Jane Urschel , speaking for CASB,  said that SB191 is a new opportunity for the advancement of K-12 education in Colorado and urged the panel to embrace the opportunity.

“It’s in your hands to create a new moment in Colorado’s history.   You are the only leaders who can reform aspects of earning tenure,” said Urschal.

Merrifield shot back at Urschel, citing her testimony on a previous bill that he sponsored asking for mandated arts curriculum in public schools, saying that she was being hypocritical by now supporting a bill that mandates the implementation of an evaluation system.

“You were very angry and self-righteous back then about an unfunded mandate,” said Merrifield.

CASE Deputy Executive Director Bruce Caughey said that he regretted the animosity created by the bill but said that the reforms were necessary and inevitable.

“I can’t think of a more important topic to be having a robust conversation about,” said Caughey. “I am sad about the divisive politics in this bill that we are fighting about.”

The measure passed 7-6 despite the  “40,000 times no” vote cast by Democratic Rep.Cherylin Peniston of Westminster–a reference to the approximate statewide membership of the CEA.  The bill must first pass muster with the House Appropriations committee before it can be considered by the full house.

Dubbed “Earn to Learn,” the measure would give low-income kids a financial incentive to improve their reading skills by reading more outside the classroom.

The reading incentive program will be available for first- through fifth-graders whose school is within the boundaries of a promise zone—a federally designated area with higher-than-average rates of dropouts and at-risk kids. The reward for reading a book outside of class time will be $2 per book–if the child successfully completes a quiz on the book.

Sponsored by Democratic Sen. Chris Romer, of Denver, and Senate Minority leader Josh Penry, of Grand Junction, Senate Bill 210 is patterned after groundbreaking research that uses economic principles to incentivize kids to learn.

Romer said that he has been following the work of Harvard economist Roland Fryer Jr., who tested and studied incentive programs for kids to close achievement gaps and found encouraging results pointing to successful outcomes. Romer wants to replicate that success here in Colorado. Romer said he called Fryer, and Fryer offered to help, if needed, to drum up support.

“I’ve always been intrigued with providing child-appropriate incentives for learning,” said Romer.  “In our world, the education world, anything that works with this kind of success is phenomenal.”

The Colorado program would be paid for out of the Read to Achieve Program, which Penry said hasn’t been utilized as well as it could be.

“Read to Achieve dollars are not serving a very high purpose right now and I’m open to new ideas and I’m very interested in this idea,” said Penry.

Penry said the innovative policy could produce positive results in ways that other programs have not.

“Market incentives work for big people and recent studies suggest that the same incentives will work for little people,” said Penry.

This year’s measure, House Bill 1036, sponsored by Rep. Christine Scanlan, D-Dillon, and Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs, differs from last year’s in that it requires school officials to post a downloadable database, deemed less costly than the searchable database called for in the previous legislation.

“This bill will help districts see where they could be saving,” said Scanlan, who added that the greater scrutiny would highlight greater savings for districts.

The bill breezed through the House Education Committee, passing unanimously.

One of the critics of the 2009 version of the bill, the Colorado Association of School Boards, stands behind the new proposal. The organization’s Jane Urschel says the less burdensome database requirement made the difference.

“This year’s bill does not impose an administrative or financial burden,” Urschel said, adding that it still will enlighten parents and other taxpayers. “It will reveal the same information.”

If approved by the full General Assembly, the measure will be phased in. Initially, the posted transactions would include budgets, annual audited financial statements, quarterly financial statements, and salary schedules.  In 2011 check registers, credit, debit and purchase card statements would have to be posted publicly. By 2012, investment-performance reports would also be included. The phase-in accommodates the various abilities of large and small districts to implement the provisions of the bill.

Proponents of the reform say it is particularly the provision requiring online disclosure of expenditures, such as thouse incurred through credit and debit cards, that will make a difference in holding local school officials accountable for activities like travel to conferences and school board retreats. Advocates of greater transparency have pointed to lavish or frivolous expenditures over the years–top-flight hotel accommodations or high-dollar meals–as a waste of public-school dollars that could have been spent in the classroom.

HB 1036, called the Public School Financial Transparency Act, contains many of the same provisions as last year’s all-GOP effort by Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Colorado Springs, and Sen. Ted Harvey, R- Highlands Ranch. That bill died on a party-line vote in the same committee. Stephens, who also is a co-sponsor on the new bill, and Harvey have reintroduced their bill again this year as Senate Bill 91, which they say would provide an easier way for people to search for and use data in a more meaningful way while including more descriptive characterizations of line items.

Stephens, however, said she would be happy to see HB 1036 pass to achieve increased transparency.

They were in a race against the clock to meet a Tuesday deadline to apply for a federal K-12 education grant  called “Race to the Top.” To compete for the federal grant, the state must show that it is ready to implement a plan to recruit, develop, reward and retain effective teachers and principals. The nationwide initiative by the Obama administration is intended to provide seed money to stimulate wide-ranging education reform.

Under the measure adopted by Colorado lawmakers, teachers and principals who graduate from an education licensure program in the state will have their performance tracked for three years after graduation, providing data to evaluate the effectiveness of their training.

Filed as Senate Bill 36, the proposal is sponsored by newcomer Sen. Michael Johnston, D-Denver, and a veteran lawmaker, Rep. Michael Merrifield, D-Colorado Springs.

The bill has enjoyed broad bipartisan support, handily sailing through both House and Senate Education Committees, and passing both chambers with only a handful of lawmakers voting in opposition.  Many lawmakers expressed their support for the tracking program; some of them have long been advocating for the kind of accountability this bill provides.

“It is so exciting for me that we are finally including higher-ed in the loop of accountability for the teachers that are working in our system,” said Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock.

The innovative nature of the program is not lost on lawmakers, who see Colorado as a leader in the effort.

“This bill is extremely important in terms of looking at being the jet-setters of the nation for education,” said Rep. Nancy Todd, D-Aurora.

One of the few lawmakers who voted against the bill, Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud, offered his colleagues the reasoning behind his vote: the cost to taxpayers, not the merits of the program itself.

“Washington is drowning in a sea of red ink,” said Lundberg, questioning the potential $400 million that could be paid out to the state if the grant is won. “From whom will it come?” he asked.  “Our children.”

The bill is now on its way to Gov. Bill Ritter, who is expected to sign it into law today or Monday.

“I have had the privilege of serving as the governor of Colorado for three years now. And what a privilege it is,” Ritter said in his opening remarks.

He spoke of strides that have been made toward education reform, fiscal reform and a new energy economy.

In reference to the federal “Race to the Top” grant money that the state is seeking for K-12 education, Ritter said that Colorado is well positioned to win some of the funding, that the state has been racing to the top for years and is ready to implement reform.

“We’re tackling the drop-out rate, and CSAPs are going the way of the dinosaurs,” declared Ritter, getting generous applause from the Democratic members in the audience. The state’s use of Colorado Student Assessment Program tests in public schools has been hotly debated for years and has many critics among Democrats.

On fiscal reform the governor talked of efforts made to stabilize the economy but acknowledged the state isn’t out of the woods yet.

“While an economic recovery is indeed underway, a revenue recovery is a year away. That means more tough, unpopular but necessary decisions,”  Ritter warned, followed by a veiled jab at the GOP, which has called on the governor to cut the size of the bureaucracy.

“It will not be enough to stay on the sidelines, to constantly criticize, to offer nothing but $10 solutions to billion-dollar problems,” he said.

The governor touted his signature, New Energy Economy, contending  it has created thousands of new jobs, new markets and new revenue.

“In these uncertain times, the New Energy Economy, which did not exist three years ago, continues to be our beacon to a brighter future,”  Ritter said.

Republican lawmakers responded to the governor’s remarks with their own prescription for Colorado.

“As lawmakers we should have one thing in mind—implementing policies that set the stage for a return to economic prosperity,” said Assistant Senate Minority Leader Greg Brophy, R-Wray.  “Republicans have one resounding message for our Democrat counterparts: Don’t raise taxes and fees during a recession.”

Ritter’s decsion last week not to seek re-election opened the door for Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper to step into the 2010 governor’s race. Hickenlooper announced on Tuesday that he would seek the Democratic nomination against leading Republican contender Scott McInnis.

At stake is federal stimulus dollars designated for K-12 education competitively awarded to the top tier of states demonstrating their commitment to education reform through concepts set forth by the Obama administration. The application deadline for first-round consideration is January 19.

Both measures would restructure the way teachers obtain and retain tenure, now granted after three years of probation. Education reformers in both parties as well as some public-school administrators long have said the current system can give a teacher too much insulation from accountability and serves as an obstacle to advancing the best teachers–or culling out the worst.

“My bill will ensure that bad teachers aren’t passed on year after year,” says Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial, a veteran lawmaker who authored one of the two pending proposals.

“I know that school districts and teachers don’t want to protect unsatisfactory teachers.  At its core, the most important component of education is the quality of the teacher,” said Spence, a longtime advocate of wide-ranging education reforms who has worked closely with both parties at the Capitol.

The Spence bill extends the probationary period of a new teacher from three years to five years and makes tenure subject to renewal every five years thereafter, pending a written review.

The other proposal is being offered by Sen. Michael Johnston, D-Denver, who was appointed to the northeast Denver seat last May by a vacancy committee when former Senate President Peter Groff resigned to take a position in the Obama administration.   Johnston has ties of his own to the Obama administration, serving as one of the president’s top three education advisers during the 2008 presidential campaign.

“My bill would revamp the entire evaluation system for teachers and principals,” said Johnston, adding that his bill, if passed, would provide, “a clear, and high, bar of how teachers earn tenure and how they keep tenure.”

The measure proposes linking teacher evaluations to student growth and measuring effective teaching.  Principals would also be evaluated based on their percentage of effective teachers, student growth and leadership abilities.   Current evaluation methods assign teachers a satisfactory or unsatisfactory rating after their three year probationary period that is arbitrary with little or no feedback, Johnston believes.

“I think that the evaluation system is broken, and I experienced that both as a teacher and as a principal,” he said. “Right now, what we have is an evaluation of teachers based on a 30-second walkthrough by a principal that doesn’t give us good information.”

Rep. Michael Merrifield, D-Manitou Springs, the House Education Committee chair who will sponsor the Johnston bill in the House along with Rep. Nancy Todd, D-Aurora, says he is glad to see the issue at last addressed. A retired schoolteacher, Merrifield says that the satisfactory rating that he always received was a meaningless label that communicated little about how he could improve or be recognized for what he was doing well.  He also feels confident that K-12 teachers will support his bill.

“Evaluations for teachers have for a long time been a joke,” said Merrifield. “If we can come up with an evaluation system that is really useful, takes a deep look at teacher’s effectiveness, and then makes suggestions on how they can be more effective teachers–I think that most teachers would be pleased to have that opportunity.”

It remains to be seen exactly how the Colorado Education Association, the state’s largest teachers union, will weigh in once the bills are formally introduced in the legislature.  Johnston and Merrifield say that they have spoken with the union and others but have not yet sat down to iron out differences.

CEA spokeswoman Deborah Fallin said her organization won’t take a position until it has been able to examine the bills, but she said extending the probationary period for a teacher, as Spence’s bill does, would be unacceptable.

“What can we find out in five years that we can’t in two to three years?” asked Fallin.

Johnston acknowledges that his bill would be dramatically different from current state law and unique among the states –earned tenure based on performance and keeping tenure based on performance –while Spence maintains that her bill would be less disruptive and a more simple solution by requiring teachers to prove their effectiveness  over a broader number of years.