|
Home
Up
News
Contact Information
Member Directory
Next Meeting
Search
Links
| |
MARS Board Meeting Minutes
December 13, 2005
Minutes from MARS meeting, Dec. 13, 2005
Present: Rep. Cleon Turner, 1st Barnstable District, Clifford Fountain, Maureen
Marshall, Bruce Kaiser, Michael Fitzpatrick,
Bob McIntyre, Michael Buoniconti, Joe Kurland, Alan D. Genovese, Stephen Hemmen,
Gene Carlo, Mindy Kempner, Lynn Ryan, Marcia Lukon, Dee Dee Niswonger
Department of Education proposal: Local and State Funding for Public
Schools: Restoring the Link with Community Wealth, is also known as the
aggregate wealth formula. It is a proposal which deals with the history of
Chapter 70, stating that the 1993 bill’s goal for state aid distribution was to
bring all districts to foundation, and that the goal has been reached. The new
proposal does not deal in any way with adequacy of that funding. It does
recognize the “serious disparities among cities and town in how much they must
pay for schools from local revenues”. It proposes an equitable, clear and
measurable means to reach a local effort goal. The proposal is judged to be well
thought out, well written and clear. However, it does not differentiate regions
from non-regions and it states “ the aggregate wealth formula seems to reduce
the need for hold-harmless. Preliminary FY06 Chapter 70 contains $264 million in
hold-harmless aid. The aggregate wealth approach generates only $183 million. An
aggregate wealth simulation for FY07 shows the number dropping further to $111
million.
“If a hold-harmless concept were to be retained in the formula, a more equitable
option would be to calculate it on a per student basis, adjusted for inflation.
This would provide protection for districts while recognizing that a significant
decline in enrollment should result in a funding adjustment over the long term.”
The problem here is that much of hold-harmless is regional school aid, the old
and now discontinued chapter 71, regional incentive aid. As the state moves
further and further away from the original commitment made to cities and towns
that were willing to give up some local power to join economically efficient
regions, those same cities and towns resent the additional financial burdens
increasingly placed upon them by the state. The cities and towns work hard to
meet their end of the old bargain; the state increasingly evades its commitment.
The 1993 formula has parts which are not understood and parts which are well
understood. The foundation budget is well understood. However it has not been
updated and does not reflect current reality, such as the immense increase in
health insurance costs, the growing costs of energy, and so forth. As
legislation allows earlier and earlier retirement, the cost of health insurance
goes up and up, and even with lower salaries of younger teachers, there is not a
cost break.
Furthermore, the 20% cut most of regions took has not only not been made up, but
with inflation has increased over time so that many have fewer dollars now than
in 02. Enrollment growth can hide this but on a per public basis, regions have
less.
Energy and transportation
We must not forget that our electric bills will increase by as much as 27% a
month come January or February. Many are in the midst of negotiations for new
bus contracts. Gene Carlo suggested that any who need to know the pier price of
fuel contact John Kustigian at
kustigian@assabet.org. We were reminded that
the cost of gasoline covered in fuel escalation clauses has to do with the New
York pier price, NOT THE PRICE AT THE PUMP.
Problems for regions:
Inadequacy of transportation reimbursement
Collapse of the state’s vision for regionalization, i.e. Incentive Aid, etc.
Threat to save-harmless
Regions which do not get their end-of –year reports in on time
Problems with assessing
Difficulty of explaining to towns’ people the way money is calculated:
assessment, local contribution, etc.
Regions have exhausted their ability to gain ever increasing support from their
towns without state support increasing.
Problems shared by all districts in the Commonwealth, regions and non-regions
Inadequacy of foundation budget
Increasing cost of energy
Lack of a formula: no system for distributing, or reducing, aid
Excessive accountability: the numerous audits. Accountability is recognized as
very important, but the current system, which is no system, is excessive.
Current wealth assessment practices do not incorporate real estate developments
across last ten years.
Costs for SPED which are primarily medical, not educational
Use of wage adjustment factor, which no longer is correct. Factor used to
manipulate Chapter70 distribution.
Unfunded mandates of No Child Left Behind. States need federal oversight on
this.
Proportionally unfair distribution of 70: 90% of aid goes to 10% of communities
Rep. Turner suggested that materials specific to regions, briefly
explaining regional problems, could be distributed to legislators to inform them
more fully about regional problems. MARS will develop these materials, which
will contain both long term goals and short term emergency issues, and get them
to the Representative so that he can distribute them.
The next Regional Caucus will be in the Berkshires the first week in January.
More on time date and place later.
The Representative was requested to send materials through the MARS office so
they can be sent out via e-mail to the MARS list.
MARS very much appreciates the time and interest of Rep. Turner whom we hope
will continue to attend occasional meetings as his schedule permits.
Respectfully submitted by Dee Dee Niswonger
MARS sends to each and every one of you wishes for a peaceful and refreshing
Holiday Season.
For More Information Contact:
Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools
P.O. Box 334, Williamsburg, MA 01096-0334
Tel: 413-268-3607
Email: Dee Dee Niswonger
|
Massachusetts Association of
Regional Schools