John Monfredo: Funding Education—Attend the City Council Meeting on Tuesday
Saturday, May 24, 2014
Each year at this time the community needs to be involved in the school budget and look what we, as a city, are allocating for our schools. This week the City-Wide Parent Planning Advisory Council, after weeks of reviewing the school budget led by their co-chairs Dante Comparetto and Shannon Ospina made their thoughts heard along with several other parents and citizens in Worcester on the steps of City Hall.
As a member of that group at City Hall I applaud their civic action. The headlines in the Worcester Telegram and Gazette had it right…”Parents’ Group: Schools still being shortchanged.” Our schools will be losing the services of about 44 teachers, loss of many programs that have been successful in meeting the needs of the students, and other personal (parent liaisons, credit recovery personal) who provide services to the students and families. In addition, many elementary class sizes will be hovering around 29 students per classroom if additional funding does not take place.
The parents are asking for the City Council to come up with additional funding beyond what is required by law from the State of Massachusetts. They are urging everyone who is concerned about education to attend the City Council meeting on May 27th at 7:00 p.m. and request additional funding.
Of the 328 School Districts in Massachusetts our City ranks in the bottom 2 % of giving above the state minimum. On an average, according to the Department of Education Website, many districts in Massachusetts spend 14% more than their foundation budget to support the educational needs of their district. All of the surrounding cities spend much more above their foundation budget( minimum required by law) than the City of Worcester does. Again, this year we are slated to receive just the 100% funding that is required by law. However, there is still a short fall ( underfunding) from last year’s budget of around $2.3 million that the city has not addressed yet.
Under the law, using a uniform set of parameters, state’s foundation budgets are calculated individually for each of the Commonwealth's 328 school districts, and they are fully recalculated prior to every new school year in order to account for changing demographics, enrollment levels, cost increases, and regional wage levels. The foundation budget is a per pupil funding formula with differentiated rates for grade or program adjusted annually for inflation. It is based on student enrollment as of October first. The formula acknowledges higher costs associated with educating English Language Learner (ELL) students through a separate base enrollment category and recognizes that low-income students and special education students have higher associated educational costs. These costs are calculated in the amount that a school system receives. In addition, each district's foundation budget is updated each year to reflect inflation and changes in enrollment.
Based on the information about its students and the city’s ability to pay ( factoring in property wealth and income wealth) the state informs the cities as to what their cost would be to support education. The state pays around 70% of the cost for education and the city is required by law to pay the rest.
1996 was the last year that Worcester played a leading role in urban district funding levels contributed 5.7 percent above the state-mandated minimum to the Worcester Public Schools. Since 1998, the city has consistently contributed less than one percent above the minimum (with the exception, 2009, 1.5%) and last year allocated less than the minimum. In contrast, communities across the state continue to support public school education at an average level of more than 14% above minimum.
At the press conference, co-chair member Comparetto stated, “The City Council has neglected to provide public education with sufficient funding to keep up with our peer communities over the past 16 years. We must reverse this trend and show we are in a position to compete with other communities across the commonwealth in meeting the demands for a high quality education. As the City Manager and City Council, you must listen to your constituents and make public education a top priority by establishing adequate financial resources. For our city to prosper, we need all of our children to have competitive educational resources.”
The other co-chair Mrs. Ospina, echoed, “Even with bare minimum school funding, the Worcester Public Schools were able to accomplish a lot this year… imagine what we could accomplish with adequate funding.”
Quite frankly, both statements are on target. We need everyone out there advocating for our children. When new families look to settle in Worcester the first thing that they do is ask about the school system. A city that spends little on the education of its children can be a deterrent for families looking to live here. We need and want young families and business people to stay in our city for a sound economy in any city depends on a good public education system. The quality of life in this community is at stake for if we don’t have a viable school system it will impact our economy and our workforce. Education is the most important economic engine to our city’s growth. In addition, unlike businesses, we cannot make up a lost year in a child’s life for children have only one shot at each grade level.
Charles Gruszka, a resident of Worcester and a retired principal in the Wachusett district, an outspoken supporter of quality education in our city wondered how the city can fund the schools at minimum and still only 30% of the city budget goes toward local funding of the public schools. He went on to say that most communities are well above the minimum and over 50% of their budget goes to fund their public schools.
Thus, I ask once again… when will we as a city be able to give additional funding for education? There are areas in the budget that we have discussed in the past but have not been enacted by the City. Once again, I am asking that the city and the schools have a meaningful discussion on a 50 – 50 split of Medicaid funds that are billed by the Worcester Public Schools to the Federal Government and processed by the schools. There are school systems that do just that! This is an important process for the school department through Special Education Services and nursing services generate about $3.2 Million that is returned to the city’s general fund. Because of an antiquated state law, none of these funds goes back to the Worcester Public Schools but the funds are placed in the city’s general fund to be used as part of the city’s budget. At least in the past, the city recognized the work of the Worcester Public Schools and provided some additional funds to defray the cost of the collection of these dollars. However, since the city isn’t meeting the required level of spending for schools, one could reasonably argue that the city is also no longer funding the contribution to collect the funds. So, the Worcester Public Schools are losing twice: receiving no benefit for collecting the money and no funds to offset the cost to collect the money.
Next, when the school department writes competitive grants and is fortunate to be the winning recipient of the grant when the money is allocated to the schools the city takes a 3% processing fee for them. In the past it was 1%. That amount of money lost in the grants process to the schools in the past has been around $900,000 and since this new arrangement has gone into effect the school department has had to give the city around four million dollars from its grants. Most districts in Massachusetts don’t even charge their school department a processing fee. Does this seem fair to you? Aren’t we all supposed to be working together in the city as one family?
The third suggestion is for the city and the schools to review the McKinney-Vento law. Under this law, school districts are required to provide transportation to homeless students so as to not disrupt their academic environment. The Worcester Public Schools spends over $500,000 annually in the transportation of homeless students. Last year, the State Auditor ruled that this was an unfunded mandate and the state should provide funds for these transportation services. The state budget this year has included funds for reimbursement of these costs. Yet, just like Medicaid, these monies will go back to the city’s general fund and not to the Worcester Public Schools to defray the cost of the program. Why can’t the city council have a line item in their budget that includes giving back the money to the school department? If we could work on a new arrangement with the city on Medicaid, the processing of grants, and on the McKinney-Vento law the schools would have the additional dollars to support the goals of the school and the community.
On the state level there is a major need to overhaul the foundation budget for when we look at the minimum allocated it falls short of meeting the needs of the children. What is clear from the Mass Budget Policy Center ( an independent research organization) is that the foundation level is quite inadequate and needs to be updated. That would be a story at another time. For the time being we, as a city, need to concentrate on adequate funding from the city for our schools.
Again, let me remind everyone that when we as a city invest in education the winners are our students, the community and the economy. Let’s not just talk about making education a priority in Worcester, let’s do it!
Related Slideshow: Which Central MA School Districts Spend the Most Per Pupil?
Based on 2012 data from the Massachusetts Department of Education, these are the 25 Central MA school districts--ranked lowest to highest--that spend the most per pupil.
Delivered Free Every
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It