Brown’s May plan offers more money, but defers payments
By Tom Chorneau, School Innovations & Advocacy Cabinet Report | http://bit.ly/JAYblb
Monday, May 14, 2012 :: Gov. Jerry Brown released his revised May budget plan Monday that would close the pending $16 billion shortfall using about $8 billion in funding cuts and the hope that voters approve his tax measure this fall.
The news for schools is better than might be expected given the magnitude of the growing shortfall – schools are proposed to receive more or less the same amount as proposed in January.
Brown touted an increase of 16 percent with state funding growing from $29.3 billion in last year’s budget to $34 billion by the end of 2013 – not an overall increase to schools but just to the state’s general fund support.
But the governor’s plan also calls for a significant amount of that money to be deferred until the end of the 2013 fiscal year – that’s even if voters approve the November tax measure.
And if the measure is defeated, schools face trigger cuts of $5.5 billion.
In a Sacramento press conference, Brown said the plan was a good compromise between cuts and new revenues – but the state still faces an enormous challenge.
“We can’t balance the budget with cuts alone; that would just further undermine our public or schools,” Brown said. “The budget I am proposing will boost funding for education, protect public safety and prevent an even deeper round of trigger cuts.”
As signaled late last week, (Cabinet Report, Wed. May 9: http://bit.ly/JxxD2o) Brown continues to want his school finance restructuring as part of the budget – a plan that would provide all schools a base per pupil grant and additional money to help economically disadvantaged students and English learners.
The new plan would be implemented over seven, not six years. Brown is proposing to increase the base grant to $5,421.
In recognition of the higher cost to educate older students, he’s included new grade spans covering grants to K-3, 4-6, 7-8 and 9-12. The new May plan would provide an adjustment to each grade span in the same way that the current charter funding model works.
Brown has proposed elimination of the K-3 class size reduction program but wants to provide an adjustment to the K-3 grade span (including the base, supplemental and concentration grants), to ensure the funding currently going into K-3 Class Size Reduction will continue to be allocated for students in those grades.
In a move to accommodate critics, the governor would preserve funding that flows to districts for the Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant and Home to School Transportation. But these programs will not be included in the flexible black grant.
The administration has pointed out that while these programs will be funded as add-on, to the weighted per pupil base, they will be fully flexible.
Brown is also proposing to fund the unpaid cost of living adjustment known as the deficit factor, as well as a pay-down of state debt to schools related to apportionment deferral – but both would be contingent on higher revenues coming in beginning in 2013-14.
Brown’s May budget ties schools, state services to November ballot
By Tom Chorneau, SI&A Cabinet Report. http://bit.ly/KcxX4S
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 :: California’s public school emerged largely unscathed from Gov. Jerry Brown’s revised May budget released Monday, although any relief is contingent on voter approval of a tax hike in November.
The governor drew headlines over the weekend that the budget shortfall had ballooned from $9 billion to almost $16 billion during recent months – but because of the influence of Proposition 98, schools can expect to receive almost the same money that the governor proposed in January while virtually all other state departments and services are looking at deep cuts.
But that’s only if taxes are approved in November.
If not, schools face the lion’s share of the cuts, some $5.5 billion coming as a result of the administration saving $2.8 billion by not paying back deferrals owed and the remaining $2.7 billion would come as a program cut to K-14 schools.
Districts would be then authorized to trim the school year by a total of 15 days through 2013-14, that’s in addition to the five days already in law.
The combination of factors has some school officials looking at the plan with unease.
John Deasy, superintendent of Los Angeles Unified, said tying the budget to the election makes decision-making on the local level almost impossible.
“If the measure passes, this will give schools some badly needed funds that have been promised over the past several years,” Deasy said in a statement. “If voters do not pass the initiative, the results are so catastrophic it is simply untenable.
“I am deeply concerned about the cash disbursements required to run the district,” he said. “This issue is absent from the current budget conversation.”
The new plan was released by Brown at a news conference in Sacramento, which he used the statewide media opportunity to make a pitch to voters in support of his November tax measure.
“Government does a lot of good things,” he explained. “Government is a nurse, it’s a teacher. It’s a highway patrolman. It’s someone working in a mental hospital, and when we cut, that’s what we cut. And there are ideologues who say government is an abstraction that you can just completely eviscerate with no impact in the real world, and that isn’t true.”
Beyond the big numbers, much of the attention from the education community on the governor’s revised May plan has been – and will continue to be – focused on his proposal to restructure school financing.
Following a number of public hearings in the Capitol where the governor’s plan drew much criticism and opposition, Brown made a number of policy changes.
The so-called weighted formula proposes to consolidate the many programs and funding sources the state provides to schools into one system with a base, per-pupil grant augmented by additional support for economically disadvantaged students and English learners.
In a key concession, the governor has agreed to increase the base grant from $4,920 per pupil to $5,421 – a level equal to the current average revenue limit for unified school districts.
In concert with that, Brown would lower funding set aside for the supplemental and concentration grants aimed at disadvantaged students. Districts will receive a supplemental grant equal to 20 percent of the base grant for each unduplicated free and reduced price lunch or English learner student.
In recognition that educating older students costs more, the governor also is proposing a grade span funding adjustment that would be built into the formula – separating grants for K-3; grades 4 through 6; grades 7 and 8, and 9 through 12. The new adjustments to each grade span would work in the same way the current charter funding model works.
Brown would also provide a longer transition period – moving implementation to a seven-year schedule rather than the six years previously proposed.
In another response to criticism, the governor is proposing to fund the unpaid cost of living adjustment known as the deficit factor, as well as a pay-down of state debt to schools related to apportionment deferral – but both would be contingent on higher revenues beginning in 2013-14.
Brown has proposed flexibility for the K-3 class size reduction program but wants to provide those funds to the K-3 grade span through higher base grants, to ensure the funding currently going into K-3 Class Size Reduction will continue to be allocated to districts with students in those grades.
In a move to accommodate critics, the governor would preserve funding that flows to districts for the Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant and Home to School Transportation. But these programs will not be included in the flexible block grant.
The administration has pointed out that while these programs will not be included in block grant allocations, they will be funded as ‘add-ons’ to the weighted, per-pupil base, and will be fully flexible
No comments:
Post a Comment