Harwich, home to Andrea Silbert, gets a pittance in local aid. For an enrollment of 1,532 students, the state sends $1,562,804 to Harwich for their schools, or $1020 per pupil.
Under the existing charter school cap, the current charter school cap for Harwich is $1,509,527 for 149 students.
If Harwich reaches the cap, the local aid remaining for Harwich would be $53,927. At the cap, charter operators would get 96.6% of Harwich’s school aid. Only 3.4% remains in town. Andrea Silbert wants to raise the cap.
Wipe out state aid for Harwich. More money for private charter operators. What are her priorities?
Too much ain’t enough?
Please share widely!
Take the state aid, add other revenue sources and Harwich looks like an above average district: spending per pupil of $8,266 (for regular education), ranking at 45 out of 308 districts
Tell that to the people who need to pay most of the freight for Harwich schools with the local property tax.
<
p>
The issue that needs to be addressed is the lack of local aid and the impact on property taxes, not how to divert more state revenues away from local schools.
All towns pay ‘most of the freight’ for their schools with local property tax. But, let’s look at Harwich.
<
p>
Look at the numbers:
<
p>
Harwich school budget:
<
p>
2004 – $12.5m
2005 – $12.7m
2006 – $12.5m
2007 – $12.9m (est)
<
p>
So, a budget that’s increased by 3% over the 4 year period, in a period where the number of pupils in the Harwich schools decreased.
<
p>
But on the bright side, student performance was quite good (top quartile by most measures) by comparison to other Mass districts.
<
p>
If anything is troublesome, it is once again, the entitlements: health insurance paid by employer is increasing faster than the rest of the budget (which is also increasing). Health insurance (current employee plus retiree) increased from 13.3% of the budget to 15.6%.
<
p>
I don’t see the school as a budget problem, but I do see entitlements as an issue and think the leaders should either 1) cause employees and retirees or future retirees to bear more of their insurance cost or 2) go for the Prop 2.5 override (which, I think, the Town is pursuing).
<
p>
Absent a 2.5 override, the employees will have to eventually eat the insurance cost increases.
If a town needs a Proposition 2.5 override to maintain current services, shouldn’t there be a local referendum before a charter school is placed in a town?
<
p>
The same taxpayers have to pay for it.
With your logic, we’d need a referendum to give employees raises.
<
p>
You know as well as I that the Charters expenses are in the numbers I cited above; spending is level and up in the Town’s budget as well as in the School’s budget; spending on per pupil is high (relative to other districts) and performance is good.
<
p>
What’s the problem that you’re tilting against? What problem do you see in the student statistics that more money will solve?
There is a vote tied to local raises. Proposition 2.5. Budget approval in Town Meeting.
<
p>
Go to Framingham and stand in front of the Juniper Hill Elementary School. That school closed when the state approved a private applicant’s plan for a charter middle school in town, and the charter put a hurt on the school budget.
<
p>
Framingham voters only had two of the three options in front of them:
(a) close the elementary school
(b) raise taxes to maintain the status quo
<
p>
They couldn’t choose
(c) we can’t afford the charter school, and it’s not at the top of our priority list.
<
p>
Shouldn’t the voters decide these kinds of things?
Money, money, funding, money, $s, %, aid, money, operators, money, local aid, formulas…
<
p>
Wish students, parents and education were part of the discussion.
<
p>
The constant attack on charter schools, which educate about 2% of the our students, reminds me of GOP attacks like: Immigration, Gay Marriage and Flag burning amendments. These are topics that don’t truly affect most of our day to day lives, but are symbolic and lend themselves to heated debate.
<
p>
Enough already. Stop worrying about the edges and focus on the larger problems.
teachers.
textbooks.
supplies.
computers.
library media specialists.
school nurses.
counselors.
coaches.
<
p>
Less money, fewer teachers, textbooks, supplies, computers, coaches. Larger class sizes, fewer electives, less services for children.
<
p>
Withdraw funding from public schools, the quality of education has to suffer.
I never knew that money paid for things! How compelling.
<
p>
Sorry for the sarcasm, but you missed my point about relevance. Of course we want every public school to have more money, including public charter schools. But charters are a blip on the budget screen. Electing a Democrat will lead to a bigger education budget for every community/school district.
<
p>
Whether more funding leads to a better educated student body in the future is up for debate. My gut says (I’m not an expert) we need bigger structural changes than that.
State aid and school funding is a major issue. I can’t believe you would dismiss the underlying funding issue as a distraction.
<
p>
Silbert’s agenda makes things worse for students in public schools. Silbert’s agenda hurts K-12 education and people struggling to pay local property taxes. Silbert’s agenda helps the private charter school industry.
<
p>
And Slushpuppy, you are using the term “public charter school.” The only time I hear that phrase is from the charter school industry. What’s your interest in charter schools?
and don’t like the options i face.
<
p>
your willingness to use hyperbole about Andrea Silbert is telling.
<
p>
charter schools are public schools. that’s a fact. so don’t call them a private industry.
<
p>
i get your point about the need for funding schools. and i support it. i just think you’re scapegoating charters.
I didn’t raise the issue of charter schools and raising the cap. Gabrieli and Silbert did. It’s the cornerstone of their education policies. And it’s wrong.
<
p>
I am merely illustrating the policy implications of their proposed policies.
<
p>
Commonwealth Charter Schools are publicly funded. They are open to the public. They are not publicly governed. They are run by private, self-appointed trustees. They are publicly funded private schools, and Commonwealth Charters are nothing more than a voucher scheme with a preferred provider list sanctioned by the state Board of Education.