"Fire in the belly is anger, but it's anger tempered with a purpose. It's passion, but passion directed at a goal, and a plan for achieving that goal."
Person #9732: 8 Posts
Recommended: 16 times
In January, Brownsberger supported yet another move to give school funding boost only to already-wealthy towns
Changes made to the Chapter 70 formula in Fiscal Year 2007 introduced the concept of establishing a target local share of school funding. The changes confirmed the relationship between each community's ability to pay with the amount of state aid they receive. The calculation is done each year by looking at property value, income and the community's foundation budget.- promoted by david
The target share is an ideal goal - and each year the legislature tries to appropriate sufficient money to provide additional funds to low and moderate income communities to get them closer to the target share. Because the target share is very different, in many cases, than what communities have been contributing to their schools, the changes in the required local contribution is moving incrementally toward the target share goals over a number of years. A good explanation of the process can be found here.
One problem with Senate Bill 211 is that it circumvents the predictable and fair process of moving communities to their ideal amount of local funding. Now the formula tries to direct available funds first to those communities that need it most. SB 211 creates a special "Equalization Fund" that direct money to communities that have previously received the smallest amount of state aid regardless of whether their need is greatest.
Another problem is that is that the "Equalization Fund" dollars would be distributed on a discretionary basis like grant funds are, but then added to the community's base aid and distributed permanently because each school district always receives at least the same Chapter 70 aid as it did the year before.
Senator Spilka does not support SB 211.