posted by Mike Madison at 8:46 PM /
Suburbia Calling pulls off a superb post here, wondering out loud, and with the credibility that only being raised in Mt. Lebanon can supply, how the federal No Child Left Behind educational statute is affecting Mt. Lebanon schools -- especially elementary schools.
This is a topic where posters might prefer the understandable security of anonymity or pseudonymity. Post comments however you like over at SC, or email your thoughts to me and let me know if you're willing to have me share the content here, sans your name. I won't guarantee that I will or won't post notes, but if I get thoughtful comments, I may post a few.
This is a topic where posters might prefer the understandable security of anonymity or pseudonymity. Post comments however you like over at SC, or email your thoughts to me and let me know if you're willing to have me share the content here, sans your name. I won't guarantee that I will or won't post notes, but if I get thoughtful comments, I may post a few.
5 Comments:
What fraction of the Lebo school budget comes from the feds? If it's so horrible, maybe they could just forego federal funding to avoid NCLB?
Cost of State and Federal Mandates for 2007-08:
Total Cost of Mandated programs:
$13,948,287
Less Federal and State Subsidies:
$5,192,843
Total unfunded mandates:
$8,755,444
Mt. Lebanon's School Budget:
$70,890,733
%of Budget attributed to State Mandates:
12.35%
Total Mills to Fund these Mandates:
4.32
% of Millage for Unfunded State and Federal Mandates:
18.35%
(this public information is available from the district finance office)
It's budget time in the District. Hope everyone is paying close attention to the process and looking for the transparency the Board promised its constituents.
I think I get the summary above - but it highlights how confusing the information from the district finance office can be.
The 07-08 budget summarizes "State Revenue Compared to Cost of Mandated Programs" (page 146).
Total state revenues delineated on page 146 total $12.3 million (not $5.1 million). This appears to consider "all" state revenues and the numbers above must only count the "direct" subsidy of specific mandates. Now - if you were intending to compare and disclose "State Revenue Compared to Cost of Mandated Programs" wouldn't you want to see Mary's comparison above not the one in the budget book?
Further, the unfunded mandates are provided for by ALL fungible revenue sources not just real estate taxes. Hence, the % of each revenue source, including millage, contributing to unfunded mandates is something less than the 18.35% shown.
Transparency begins at home - - and the home of the budget is the district finance office.
I still don't understand the summary. Or rather, I don't know how the summary answers my question, so here's a simpler question:
What would happen if MTLSD just refused to implement NCLB?
My speculation is the simple question is way complicated.
First, most state and/or federal funding comes with strings attached, so a sizeable percentage of the $12+ million in subsidies could be at risk for abandoning NCLB or other mandated programs.
Second, a considerable portion of the $13.9 million in mandated programs might just be darn good education, which would continue even if not mandated. I can't imagine all these programs are a total waste.
Third, while I am big on local control of our schools, regrettably I am afraid some segments of the student population would not receive adequately funded programs, without mandates.
Fourth, while unfunded mandates can be a serious problem. They can also become an easy excuse for why local taxes are what they are. Only unfunded mandates that serve little or no purpose (or are counter productive) deserve to be fussed about.
Post a Comment
<< Home