More detail more pain . . .

After perusing the governor’s budget in more detail the areas below are where we will feel the impact to our staffing and to our programs if we are not able to backfill the revenue loss. I am not faulting the governor as she has been clear that she does not want to make these cuts and would like to see a better balance by increasing revenue as well as making cuts, but it is still disheartening. As Ethan said in a comment to yesterday’s post speaking for Scott and himself.

I'm with Scott. It is frustrating. Many predicted we'd end up in exactly this situation a few years ago when the reforms were greenlighted with no plan for how to fund them. Scott spoke of how, even though the cuts don't come as a surprise they are still disappointing. I'm right there with him on that one too. It is dispiriting. Until there is fundamental change in how education is funded we will continue to go through these cycles of hope and frustration. Knowing about it, predicting it, expecting it doesn't help me (and I would guess many others) keep at bay the very human response of being deeply disappointed and feeling like our work is unvalued.

The proposed cuts in the governor's budget would result in revenue loss of about $2.8 million for next year. This is on top of the approximately $3.6 million in adjustments we made to balance this year's budget.

*Eliminate Local Effort Assistance (LEA) 470,000
*Eliminate K-4 Class Size Enhancement 1,400,000
*Eliminate I-728 915,000
*Eliminate Gifted Program Funding 65,000
*TOTAL $2,850,000

One of the more disturbing parts of the governor’s proposal is her plan to ask for an increase in the local levy lid to 36% for all school districts. For years, there has been a push by some “rich” districts to raise the lid, but only in difficult times has it been done and not by the amount she is proposing. I believe that it went up about 2% over time to compensate for lost revenue. We are currently at 24.7% so going to 36% would be an increase of about $7 million per year if we were to ask for and the community would pass this amount. The problem with this is that it once again shifts the burden from the state to the local community to pay for “basic” education services. Some of the surrounding districts will applaud this as it will be easy for them to pass. Others will have difficulty gaining support at this level from their local community.

The problem is heightened by the fact that we and others are taking action this month on levy resolutions for a February ballot that sets the dollar amount for collection for the next four years. We have done this not knowing what the levy base will be because of other discussions at the legislative level that would artificially raise money to partially offset last year’s cuts and now we have this possibility to confront. Our board was to take action next Tuesday on our recommended levy amount that we must now revisit for potential adjustments. Do we still go for four years with all the unknowns or do a two year levy? How much do we ask our community support? What we do know is that we must go before our community once more and ask them to decide on what they want to commit in local taxes to define the scope of programs we offer in our schools. Time will tell if we experience success. There must be a better way to do this.