Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
Both School Committeeperson Jackie Doherty, and Dick Howe, have great posts centering around an online video about the city’s proposed budget for schools. In the video, Lowell state Rep Kevin Murphy gives his view on the local option taxes. But more importantly (to Jackie and Dick) he also made a point of saying that the local officials need to guarantee that extra money goes to the schools. From Murphy:
I don’t really have a problem with local options [tax]…I just hope you [the schools] get the money, because that hasn’t been guaranteed….the city side commitment to public education in Lowell falls short of where it should be.
[…]
We ought to be telling the city council that they should step to the plate [on school funding]…we’ve done as much as we can…so I suggest you continue to lobby them, and get some type of commitment…
Specifically, it appears Murphy was talking about the local options meals taxes Governor Patrick proposed. Since the April 25 video of Murphy was shot, Lynch proposed his Lowell budget, which does show where any extra money from local option taxes (which could also include revenues from rescinding the outdated 93-year-old telecom pole tax exemption) might go. If I recall, some would go to schools, but not all. (It’s also not clear if local options taxes will be earmarked for property tax relief, not spending, although one easily can argue that the cuts to the budget are already tax relief for this coming year.)
Lynch’s budget is bare-bones, and responsible, and very transparent. However, I differ with the city manager in that I would rather pay a few dollars more in property tax (and if this summer we become home owners, this affects me very much) than see such drastic cuts from the schools, who have already lagged behind in funding for years, and are showing it. Our property tax burden is nothing compared to other local towns, and we should be willing to ensure our schools don’t fall apart any further. I would call on the city councilors, who are staring down an election year, to have half a backbone and call for a modest increase from the proposed tax rate for next year. Costs are going up (health care, building and maintenance costs, especially) and until the state fulfills the promise of a buy-in for towns into the statewide health care for government employees, we will have to bite the bullet.
Another question posed to me was, did the city side of the budget have as much as 8% cut from it, which is the amount being asked of the schools? Enquiring minds do want to find out…anyone good in math want to take a peek at the budget for me?
[powered by WordPress.]
42 queries. 0.715 seconds
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Now do we know if there’s actually a correlation between education spending and student achievement in Massachusetts? I really doubt that it exists.
Whether the money gets earmarked or not, it’s just going to go to the hiring of educational bureaucrats as opposed to some other useless bureaucrat.
May 22nd, 2007 at 6:39 pm
I remember Lowell’s first Ed reform check $675,000.00. $600,000.00 went to salaries and $75,000 went to the children ( books, field trips, curriculum etc. This is the basic problem I have with Lowell school budgets. I’m not against teachers making money my question is, how much is enough? Take a teacher’s annual salary and divided by # of hours worked the same way the rest of the workforce does you’ll be amazed. Try using the argument of time off should count and watch the union’s blood pressure go up.
May 22nd, 2007 at 8:56 pm
From what I understand, and I just skimmed Jackie’s original post so anyone can correct me, but the complaint was that the city’s payments into the school budget were cut by 8%. Given that the city contribution was pretty low to begin with and this was a good year for chapter 70, the overall amount of money in the schools certainly didn’t go down by 8% and probably went up - of course expenses go up year over year too.
Lowell gets a good rate off of chapter 70 though. In Tyngsboro, the state pays just over a third of our school expenses depending on how you do the math, in Lowell it’s like 85%.
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:48 am
Eight per cent cut?? Eight per cent of what? I’m pretty sure that the school budget will be higher this year than it was last year. The question is by how much. Since when is a lowering in the rate of increase a cut?
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Here’s my question. Does the budget amount include the raises already offered to the teachers or will that be added on after the contract is settled? You can bet the city side of the budget will be hard pressed to get raises the teachers are seeking for next year.
May 24th, 2007 at 1:35 am
The city proposes the #s for the school side but the school committee and the (superintendant?) have to come up with their own budget on their side seperately. It may or may not match the number from the city. Then, the CC has to figure out how to reconcile. At least, that’s my impression of the process.
May 24th, 2007 at 11:41 am
It is an 8% decrease.
FY 07, the City’s Contribution was about $21,000,000; Chapter 70 Money, about $110,878,136 = $131,878,136. FY 08, the School Committee’s Proposed Budget, which is approved and given to the City before the City Manager presents the City’s overall budget asked for $136,758,089; with an anticipated Chapter 70 Money of about $115,758,089, that keeps the City’s contribution to about $21 M.
However, the proposed FY 08 City budget reduces the School’s budget to $135,175,089; making the City’s contribution $19,417,000. That is an 8% reduction from last year.
I heard the Superintendent on the radio this week and she did state that she was informed by CM Lynch of the reduction before he submitted his budget to the CC and to the rest of us. I am curious as to what she did with that information, if anything.
May 24th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Jason:
I think the answer to your question is yes. The Superintendent in her narrative introducing the School Budget wrote: “The Recommended Budget will enable the School Department to meet all known and expected contractual obligation for…Anticipated Wage/Salary Adjustments.”