Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Screwing Northern Berkshire County

By

A appropriately snarky and cynical editorial from the North Adams Transcript. Click on the link and read just how ticked off we are in in Northern Berkshire County:

Thanks so much, Gov. Patrick, for the 30 bucks for Adams-Cheshire. And the 7 grand for Savoy. And — hold on to your hats — a whopping $142,956 for Clarksburg.

It gladdens the heart how much you and your chief education officials are thinking about North Berkshire, where every community, even the school-parsimonious Mother Town of Adams, has met or surpassed their minimum required commitment to education funding since the passage of the Education Reform Act of 1993.

So why should we be upset if far wealthier towns that haven’t bothered to meet their obligation to education get a big fat chunk of cash from your idea of how to parcel out $168 million in federal stimulus money? You know, towns like Mansfield ($2.1 million), Shrewsbury ($1.2 million) and Westford ($1.6 million)?

…..

Edited per Lynne’s not so subtle knee jerk in comments.  

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Epic fail. This user post should be deleted for fair use reasons. And, it doesn’t really qualify as a user post, either.

    • I’ve edited it to your standards and hopefully the copyright police don’t get their knickers in a twist.

      <

      p>Considering that no one in your part of the state gives a crap about this area except when you visit our museums or come to go skiing, I think that heavy quoting from OUR OWN regional media is perfectly appropriate. You certainly will not see it otherwise.

        • other people’s diaries for TOS violations and offering unproductive commentary, or declaring that views I disagree with should be deleted.

          <

          p>Had your wife’s(?) criticism been made in the form of a suggestion rather than a request for deletion, I would have changed the post and I would not have come away with the impression that she is a busybody.

          <

          p>So, “bite me” to you, as well.

  2. Population
    Berkshire County: 134,953
    Massachusetts: 6,497,967
    2% of the population of the state live in Berkshire County, so that they would get 1.5% of the funding is not dramatically off target.

    <

    p>The larger point about the arbitrariness of the distribution is certainly valid.  I’d be curious to see what criteria were used.  

    • “Sill, it seems kind of strange, if not downright insulting, that of the $168 million in federal money only $2.45 million, or 1.5 percent of the total, should go to Berkshire County…what’s the combined population of those communities, a lousy 26,000, if that?”

      <

      p>You kinda answer your own question on that one.

    • simply .5% of the total and you get a different result.

      <

      p>Are you saying that our kids are worth 1/3rd less than the rest of the state’s?

      <

      p>The formula that the Guv used was the “foundation” spending formula, which several wealthy school districts ignore because they are more than solvent or others have failed to implement because their bureaucracies are financial misfits. Not meeting “foundation” spending does not actually mean you are underfunding your schools. It is a legal.accounting definition and the Guv should be ashamed for relying on something so damn simplistic.

      <

      p>In North Adams, because budgets are always extremely tight, even in good times, the School Committee diligently works to meet the “foundation” guidelines, but this leaves other aspects of both the school and city budgets really short.

      <

      p>Even with the foundation spending, we are closing a middle school and splitting the grades back into elementary schools or up to high school. So is Adams. We are laying off teachers, Cutting buses, Freezing certain salaries, Asking unions to help with the cuts, etc…..

      <

      p>If that is the governor considers “foundation”, he is clueless.

      • rather than regional discrimination.

        <

        p>As the editorial pointed out, Pittsfield did just fine with $2.1 million and a population of 43,000. (Better than Shrewsbury, not as good as Mansfield, to respond to your second point)

        <

        p>The goal of the stimulus funding should be to send funds where they’re needed most, and if it turns out that Berkshire County needs 25% less (not 33%, double check your math) than the state as a whole, they shouldn’t automatically be entitled to funding equality.

        <

        p>If I understand you correctly, you’re saying that North Adams didn’t get additional funding because they weren’t funding their schools adequately according to some arbitrary definition.  If this is indeed the case, then funds should definitely be sent their way.  It’s very catch-22ish to say that because your schools don’t have money we won’t give them any money.

        <

        p>I’m not defending the current spending plan, which I’m not knowledgeable enough to have an informed opinion on.  My  point was that the North Adams Transcript (and you be extension, since you didn’t really provided much analysis) is paying fast and loose with numbers to try to raise outrage, rather than making a reasoned case why the formula should be changed.

        • North Adams, one of the poorest communities in the state, funds our schools by the definition of the 1993 law and hence meets the “foundation” level at great sacrifice to the rest of the city’s budget. The fact that we scrape together the money actually disqualifies us for the Guv’s plan.

          <

          p>Our school age population is hugely “at risk.” 2/3rds qualify for free lunch. 50% arrive in kindergarten “unprepared.” Our Drop-out rate hovers between 30-40%. Our facilities are falling apart, which is one of the reasons the crunch is forcing the closure of the middle school. Our transportation costs are outrageous compared to larger districts that can fill buses. Our SPED rate is around 25%.

          <

          p>Our poor little city finds the money to fund this district because it’s the right thing to do and the law says we should. But now you get a wealthy suburban district, that can skirt the minimum, but has good facilities, lower SPED rates, cheap transportation, no poverty, no “at-risk” population, etc… but because they have the luxury to play games with “foundation funding” they get millions.

          <

          p>Broken doesn’t even begin to describe it.

    • Mansfield Population: 23,000
      Mansfield Education Stimulus Total: $2,100,000
      Shrewsbury Population: 32,000
      Shrewsbury Education Stimulus Total: $1,200,000
      Massachusetts Population: 6,500,000

      <

      p>You do the math. I’m tired of of people who think that little numbers don’t matter in rural areas. We can’t just look one ‘burb to the left or right. We are out here relatively isolated.

  3. This comes from the same web site and  as you can see some numbers are good some not so good but generally they appear on balnace I would suggest you review the numbers and if they are incorrect you may want ot get yor rep on the line and get him to correct the information but from what I can see on the per pupil side of the argument your not doing to badly.

    <

    p>http://www.bestplaces.net/city

    <

    p>Woburn public schools spend $6,995 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 0 students per teacher in Woburn.

    <

    p>Cheshire  public schools spend $5,829 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about ? students per teacher in Cheshire (zip 01225).
    Adams public schools spend $6,386 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 0 students per teacher in Adams.
    North Adams public schools spend $7,173 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 0 students per teacher in North Adams.
    Williamstown public schools spend $7,731 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 0 students per teacher in Williamstown.

    <

    p>Cheshire is low and certainly you have a case for an ajustment I think if you can remain civil unlike JQA has been of late I think you could make a good case but as for the rest I think your just about on par with my community here inside of RTE128

    <

    p>As Usual just my Opinion

    <

    p>

    • Hey remeber it is a web site not a granite monument you may find better numbers but here again it looks much stronger then some of Eastern Mass per pupil also remember a number of differant factors are included in the calculation as much as you want ot hit the governor on this you may want to have your Rep look into it and do a night on the formula. I know we did that several years ago here maybe a decade ago and it was very helpful in making a case for additional funds. Certainly better then beating the heck out of Doug Ruben on BMG if you want o get ahead.

      <

      p>Savoy public schools spend $8,005 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 11 students per teacher in Savoy.
      Clarksburg public schools spend $7,739 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 11 students per teacher in Clarksburg.

      <

      p>As Usual just my Opinion

      • costs rural districts considerably more. It is far more expensive, pupil for pupil, to run a district in a rural town than it is in a city or ‘burb.  

        • Our town started billing us for grades 7+, the children get a ticket they need to carry to ride the bus. It is a choice though. You can opt out and drive your child to school. No-one was happy about it.

    • after spending $6316 per student.

      <

      p>The point is that the formula was and is arbitrary crap.

      <

      p>You can bet that the legislature is going to do the work that the Patrick Administration failed to do.

      • Youjust want to denie the fact that the formula weighs a whole host of things that were chosen to try and take a balanced approach now what did apply in 1990’s may have changed enough that it needs to be tweeked today. But really when it was written it was far superior to the old ways. I am sure you originally did far better then you did in the early 80’s

        <

        p>and I would question the cost of bussing what are you paying per bus here in Woburn true we may not run the miles but the higher costs of the busses sure do pinch the budget we run between $40-50,000.00 per year per bus that’s how the bidding goes and we were hit by Fuel surcharges last year this year it looks like we will not.

        <

        p>So maybe you need to look more closely I know that here in Woburn ans well as all of the surrounding towns are constantly struggling with education as a cost and always looking for more help. Formulas that favor one year seem to hurt others as people move and the economy changes. Yet you have to admit those numbers I posted if 100% correct paint a slightly differant picture then your screaming about so maybe take a deep breath and look around the grass is not always greener sometimes its all just Brown.

        <

        p>As Usual Just my Opinion

    • Adams got $30 dollars those swines and Woburn did not even make the list Darn I am going to march on Adams and demand my cut Darn Hillbillies in the Mountain state. OOPS1 that is part of Massachusetts now isn’t it. Wasn’t Abraham Lincoln great!

      <

      p>Smile life is going by

      <

      p>As Usual just my Opinion

      <

      p>

      • My point is that the formula, be it one that worked in the 90’s (I doubt it), is no longer relevant to actual district needs. And I am royally p*ssed that the Guv used this particular cookie cutter to distribute the funds.

        • … that the poorer regions tend to get steam rolled based upon a quick read of the list.

          <

          p>A little known fact is that aside from the Tanglewood crowd (our Governor’s country home fits this definition) Berkshire County is one of the poorest areas of the state. Our property values are lower. Our incomes are lower. …. you get the picture.

          • And maybe BerkCo is poorer, I dunno.  But look: property values are high in Boston and people make more, but that doesn’t mean that they are richer or poorer in terms of purchasing power.

            <

            p>I’d be willing to bet that the percent of families (1+ parent, 1+ child) living in homes smaller than 700 square feet is higher in Boston than it is in BerkCo.  Those in Boston are paying more for ’em too.

            <

            p>The reality is that if you live far from an economic engine and in a low density area, then you lose out on economies of scale with respect to transportation, commerce, and the like.  You gain on beauty, on peace and quiet, and so forth.  You also have the ability to buy a home for far less money… low property values don’t imply poverty.

            • instead of an OpEd.  Those pesky articles actually have to include factual information. North Adams Transcript

              <

              p>

              Education Secretary Paul Reville said in a telephone interview Friday that the formula used to determine which towns would receive stimulus aid to bring them up to foundation level is the same one used by the state education department to calculate the annual Chapter 70 allotments.

              “The short answer is that its the same formula that’s been funding North Adams for the last 16 years,” Reville said. “The formula requires each town or city to fund 821Z 2 percent of its foundation budget locally, with 171Z 2 percent coming from the commonwealth. If you look deeply at these districts, many of them, although wealthier, have had changes to their composition — increases in students, English language learners [students with another primary language besides English] or low-income students. By level funding these districts in fiscal 2010, we are asking them to fund more than their required foundation contribution.”

              Reville said districts like Shrewsbury also receive less per pupil state aid than North Adams or Williamstown in any given year.

              “If you look at North Adams, the amount of state aid they receiver per pupil is $9,000, while Wellesley receives $1,300 a year and Belmont receives $1,200 a year,” he said. “North Adams has been a big beneficiary of the formula for the last 16 years, and this is not the time to attack it.”

              • It confirms that districts with a great tax base who do not fund their schools according to the law get the stimulus checks and those who are poorer, but actually make the budget happen, do not.

                <

                p>Reville is being lazy and relying on his spreadsheet rather than analyzing actual needs.

                <

                p>How many schools in Wellesley were going to close without the stim funds? How many teachers were going to be laid off?

                <

                p>I will bet Adams’ share of the funds that the number is ZERO.

              • I know we can’t make them read but mybe if we scatter it their coffee table and staple it to the Sears Catalog they will look it over. It certainly would appear this puts to rest their complaint once and for all Thank you John K for posting it

                <

                p>As Usual Just My Opinion

                • You see, I had read that article in last Friday’s paper and I responded quite appropriately in the reply just PRIOR to yours.

                  <

                  p>I will say it again – The Guv did NOT have to use chapter 70 formulations to distribute the funds. Read the NYTimes article that says that Mass is not alone.

          • Yes you are correct in all of your postings except1 and this is the focus of your posts as I read them that the Governor has control over who gets what.

            <

            p>With one small exception of yes he could file a bill to change it he must work with in the framework that has passed the house and senate and signed by a sitting Governor. So as I will repeat my self your points are correct your focus may be just a tad off the mark in zeroing in on Deval Patrick as the cause and god of the funding.

            <

            p>Even more to support your point we do need, and Deval can lead on this, we do need reform on a lot of issues Transportation, Property Tax, Energy, and certainly Education we need to revisit all of the formulas. On a simple wish list of my own I would like to see a progressive tax structure. I would like to see a set standard for funding broken down to issues such as sped and transportation that treats every student equally while producing a system that increases performance but more importantly graduation. I also want to see a state board such as Pennsylvania currently has that sets Green building and High Efficiency standards for all local and state buildings. I would certainly give up blogging about regional planning if we could begin to move forward on this issue. And on and on I am sure everyone reading and writing here has their list and all good points. Except JQ. The fact of the matter is and the fact of the point is the Governor is not a King or a God he is a man elected to move the agenda forward and he is doing that maybe not fast enough but pushing this rock up hill takes time.

            <

            p>We still have people calling this Taxachusetts as they drive over roads with more pot holes then a slice of Swiss cheese that jump up and down when a piece of concrete falls off the overpass and lands on their care and at the drop of a hat jump up and down and yell waste waste waste. Maybe just maybe if well all sit and talk we can come to some consensus about the issues that are most important but try to remember the House and Senate play a key role for all of them the pie has shrunk as well and for just as many issues as we rant about here their is a new person calling or walking in the door who needs money for a good program or idea not on our plate.

            <

            p>We all need to learn how to be better advocates for what we need and we need to set some basic frameworks that include our priorities. Until we can do that we may be stuck with the same discussions we are having here over and over again.

            <

            p>No easy solution that is why we are all trying so hard to be heard. But focus on the people you need to convince.

            <

            p>As Usual Just my Opinion

            • the Governor was under no obligation to distribute the funds under this formula.

              <

              p>For that matter, the legislature is, indeed, taking up this very issue and reportedly the DOE’s numbers are going to be overruled dramatically in many cases.

              <

              p>I hate to say this, but I get the feeling that the administration was looking for brownie points and rushed the whole deal to the press before they did their homework.

              • What then?  X dollars per outraged blog comment?  X dollars per pupil?  Canvass all 351 towns to get a measure of their needs, balance them carefully, then come down Mount Sinai/the governor’s office and announce the arbitrary decision?

                <

                p>Coming up with another formula that was less arbitrary than the current one would have taken so long that the stimulus funds would have been useless for budget planning.

    • Boston $0
      Cambridge $0
      Somerville $0

      <

      p>What? Does the state not care about urban kids? huh? huh?

      • However, I do believe that the large cities fall under a different funding scenario.

        <

        p>That said, I still maintain that the formula is crap and discriminates against poorer districts.

        • Urban areas have different funding scenarios because their community liaison, foster liaison, ELL education, and other expenses are far higher than suburban and exurban districts.

          <

          p>Greg, I don’t think there are too many people who are happy today about the level of education funding, and the formula (which I believe the governor is required to use) is often impenetrable.  Of course, as is noted upthread, the ideal is to fund to the level needed by  the students, not per acre, town resident, or even pupil.  The whole thing frankly could use an overhaul.

          <

          p>By the way, if you want to talk about getting screwed, look at the entirety of Cape Cod.

Archives