Who Is In Charge

School finance bill set to launch

The 2012-13 school finance bill will be focused on shoring up state aid to school districts, according to its sponsor, with a modest amount of spending for special programs.

Legislature 2012 logoImproved state revenues have made it possible for the Joint Budget Committee to set aside $57 million that’s intended for maintaining average per-pupil spending in 2012-13 at the same level as this year, a little under $6,500.

In years before the state budget squeeze, the annual school finance bill often was used to fund various specialized education programs as well as to set the overall level of school funding. Four years of budget cuts have not only dried up funding for those programs but also forced cuts in operational funding for school districts.

Given that improving revenues make it possible to avoid K-12 cuts, Rep. Tom Massey said Wednesday the school finance act will focus on accomplishing that. The bill could be introduced as early as Thursday.

Massey is a prime sponsor of the finance bill and chair of the House Education Committee. He said he’s proposing two significant “extras” in the finance act, $1.3 million to fund the Department of Education’s regional services program and an extra $1 million for charter school facilities costs.

The regional services program, created a few years ago but not funded, is intended to pay for CDE to provide small districts and boards of cooperative education services with expertise and consulting for work they’re unable to do on their own.

For charter schools, current law provides $5 million a year, distributed on a per-pupil basis, that charters can use for building needs. Massey’s proposal would add $1 million to that amount.

Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs, said Wednesday that the bill also will include $300,000 to pay for giving every student skills tests such as the Accuplacer once during high school.

Massey hopes – and thinks – other lawmakers will resist the temptation to dip too much into the $57 million for special programs.

“Everyone understands the realities” of the budget situation and the need to maintain K-12 spending levels, he said.

Massey and other House Ed members met Wednesday morning with CDE staff and two JBC members for a briefing on the budget situation and its effect on K-12.

“I just want you to know we’re in a very tentative position financially,” said JBC chair Rep. Cheri Gerou, R-Evergreen, subtly urging lawmakers to avoid the temptation to “go shopping” in the school finance act.

Budget hightlights

Leeanne Emm, CDE school finance director, walked the meeting through the expected school finance situation for 2012-13. Based on her analysis, here’s what things look like:

$5.29 billion in total program funding would be available to schools, compared to the current $5.23 million.

  • Average per pupil funding would be $6,474.24, compared to this year’s $6,404.49 without the additional $57 million. (Actual per-pupil funding varies widely by district.) The amount would still be below the $7,076 per-pupil average in 2009-10, a figure approved in the last legislative session before the recession hit.
  • Base funding per student would be $5,843.26 up from $5,634.77 this year. Base funding is the minimum amount guaranteed under Amendment 23 to every school district and is driven by inflation, calculated at 3.7 percent for next year.
  • Next year’s statewide enrollment is estimated at 817,185, an increase of 9,027, or 1.1 percent.

While the latest budget news is a welcome change for education, next year’s funding will be considerably less than what it would be under the original method of applying Amendment 23, the 2000 constitutional change that set a funding formula for K-12.

Prior to 2009, the legislature multiplied both base funding and other parts of school support by inflation to come up with total program funding for the following school year. (Amendment 23 originally required addition of another 1 percent, but that provision has expired.)

Because of declining state revenues, in 2009 the legislature created a “negative factor” that allowed it to cut annual school spending enough to balance the budget without gutting other state programs. K-12 spending accounts for more than 40 percent of spending from the state’s general fund.

The expected negative factor for 2012-13 is estimated at $1 billion, meaning that total program funding for schools would be $6.3 billion next year if Amendment 2 were being used as it was prior to the recession.

See Emm’s slide presentation to the committee here.

The main 2012-13 state budget bill, House Bill 12-1335, was introduced in the House Wednesday. That measure sets the base level of school funding as required by Amendment 23. The “long bill” proposes state funding of about $512 million for state colleges and universities, plus another $100 million for financial aid.

The House isn’t expected to finish work on the budget bill until the middle of next week. Then the Senate has to consider the bill.

Who Is In Charge

Indianapolis Public Schools board gives superintendent Ferebee raise, bonus

PHOTO: Dylan Peers McCoy
Lewis Ferebee

Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lewis Ferebee is getting a $4,701 raise and a bonus of $28,000.

The board voted unanimously to approve both. The raise is a 2.24 percent salary increase. It is retroactive to July 1, 2017. Ferebee’s total pay this year, including the bonus, retirement contributions and a stipend for a car, will be $286,769. Even though the bonus was paid this year, it is based on his performance last school year.

The board approved a new contract Tuesday that includes a raise for teachers.

The bonus is 80 percent of the total — $35,000 — he could have received under his contract. It is based on goals agreed to by the superintendent and the board.

These are performance criteria used to determine the superintendent’s bonus are below:

Student recruitment

How common is it for districts to share student contact info with charter schools? Here’s what we know.

PHOTO: Laura Faith Kebede
Staff members of Green Dot Public Schools canvass a neighborhood near Kirby Middle School in the summer of 2016 before reopening the Memphis school as a charter.

As charter schools emerge alongside local school districts across the nation, student addresses have become a key turf war.

Charter schools have succeeded in filling their classes with and without access to student contact information. But their operators frequently argue that they have a right to such information, which they say is vital to their recruitment efforts and gives families equal access to different schools in their area.

Disputes are underway right now in at least two places: In Tennessee, school boards in Nashville and Memphis are defying a new state law that requires districts to hand over such information to charters that request it. A New York City parent recently filed a formal complaint accusing the city of sharing her information improperly with local charter schools.

How do other cities handle the issue? According to officials from a range of school districts, some share student information freely with charters while others guard it fiercely.

Some districts explicitly do not share student information with charter schools. This includes Detroit, where the schools chief is waging an open war with the charter sector for students; Washington, D.C., where the two school sectors coexist more peacefully; and Los Angeles.

Others have clear rules for student information sharing. Denver, for example, set parameters for what information the district will hand over to charter schools in a formal collaboration agreement — one that Memphis officials frequently cite as a model for one they are creating. Baltimore and Boston also share information, although Boston gives out only some of the personal details that district schools can access.

At least one city has carved out a compromise. In New York City, a third-party company provides mass mailings for charter schools, using contact information provided by the school district. Charter schools do not actually see that information and cannot use it for other purposes — although the provision hasn’t eliminated parent concerns about student privacy and fair recruitment practices there.

In Tennessee, the fight by the state’s two largest districts over the issue is nearing a boiling point. The state education department has already asked a judge to intervene in Nashville and is mulling whether to add the Memphis district to the court filing after the school board there voted to defy the state’s order to share information last month. Nashville’s court hearing is Nov. 28.

The conflict feels high-stakes to some. In Memphis, both local and state districts struggle with enrolling enough students. Most schools in the state-run Achievement School District have lost enrollment this year, and the local district, Shelby County Schools, saw a slight increase in enrollment this year after years of freefall.

Still, some charter leaders wonder why schools can’t get along without the information. One Memphis charter operator said his school fills its classes through word of mouth, Facebook ads, and signs in surrounding neighborhoods.

“We’re fully enrolled just through that,” said the leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity to protect his relationship with the state and local districts. “It’s a non-argument for me.”

A spokeswoman for Green Dot Public Schools, the state-managed charter school whose request for student information started the legal fight in Memphis, said schools in the Achievement School District should receive student contact information because they are supposed to serve students within specific neighborhood boundaries.

“At the end of the day, parents should have the information they need to go to their neighborhood school,” said the spokeswoman, Cynara Lilly. “They deserve to know it’s open.”