On the fence about a local school bond election

[BvillePoker]

My town is voting tomorrow on a school bond that totals to about $36/$100,00 property tax. I know all the reasons to vote for it. I know the state has cut their funding this year. I know there are some dire maintenance and spending needs for text books, teacher salaries, etc etc. I have three basic problems with the proposed bond. First, I think they are still top heavy in administration in the school district and they have made some questionable spends in the last 3 years building new facilities and renovating existing ones. Second, they are proposing this bond to pay for the things that they cannot use the state money on so that they can use a larger percentage of the state funds for the things it will be allowed to spend for with state money. That seems a little bit like like sideways accounting, but yet totally legit and legal for them to do. I can get past that one. But third, and most of the issue for me, is that I think this would be pumping more money in to an inherently flawed system that will never provide the optimal results for the issues surrounding public education. I do not believe more money is going to fix anything or make anything better in our school district and they bill it as a stop gap fix for state budget shortfalls that will never be given back. This bond issue is just propping up a failing and dieing system.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

But third, and most of the issue for me, is that I think this would be pumping more money in to an inherently flawed system that will never provide the optimal results for the issues surrounding public education. I do not believe more money is going to fix anything or make anything better in our school district and they bill it as a stop gap fix for state budget shortfalls that will never be given back. This bond issue is just propping up a failing and dieing system.

This is where I'm at every time.

 

[BvillePoker]

Here are some facts that keep me from wanting to spend more money locally on public education according to a CATO institute study found here.
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa746.pdf

The study from the CATO Institute shows that American student performance has remained poor, and has actually declined in mathematics and verbal skills, despite per-student spending tripling nationwide over the same 40-year period.

Congressional mandates and the provision of comprehensive special education, after school programs and increasing technology costs have increased public education budgets. This is in contrast to private schools, where students excel over public school peers, but manage to operate at budgets about 34 percent lower than taxpayer-funded schools, US Finance Post reports.

At one time or another over the past four decades, Alaska, California, Florida and New York all experienced multi-year periods over which real spending fell substantially (20 percent or more of their 1972 expenditure levels),” Coulson wrote. “And yet, none of these states experienced noticeable declines in adjusted SAT scores.
Adjusted state SAT scores have declined by an average of 3 percent. This echoes the picture of stagnating achievement among American 17-year-olds painted by the Long Term Trends portion of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a series of tests administered to a nationally representative sample of students since 1970. That disappointing record comes despite a more-than-doubling in inflation-adjusted per pupil public-school spending over the same period (the average state spending increase was
120 percent). Consistent with those patterns, there has been essentially no correlation between what states have spent on education and
their measured academic outcomes. In other words, America’s educational productivity appears to have collapsed, at least as measured by
the NAEP and the SAT.

 

[07pilt]

Here are some facts that keep me from wanting to spend more money locally on public education according to a CATO institute study found here.
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa746.pdf

The study from the CATO Institute shows that American student performance has remained poor, and has actually declined in mathematics and verbal skills, despite per-student spending tripling nationwide over the same 40-year period.

Congressional mandates and the provision of comprehensive special education, after school programs and increasing technology costs have increased public education budgets. This is in contrast to private schools, where students excel over public school peers, but manage to operate at budgets about 34 percent lower than taxpayer-funded schools, US Finance Post reports.

At one time or another over the past four decades, Alaska, California, Florida and New York all experienced multi-year periods over which real spending fell substantially (20 percent or more of their 1972 expenditure levels),” Coulson wrote. “And yet, none of these states experienced noticeable declines in adjusted SAT scores.
Adjusted state SAT scores have declined by an average of 3 percent. This echoes the picture of stagnating achievement among American 17-year-olds painted by the Long Term Trends portion of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a series of tests administered to a nationally representative sample of students since 1970. That disappointing record comes despite a more-than-doubling in inflation-adjusted per pupil public-school spending over the same period (the average state spending increase was
120 percent). Consistent with those patterns, there has been essentially no correlation between what states have spent on education and
their measured academic outcomes. In other words, America’s educational productivity appears to have collapsed, at least as measured by
the NAEP and the SAT.

Shocking that education spending has little effect on scores on what amounts to an intelligence test.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Shocking that education spending has little effect on scores on what amounts to an intelligence test.

So instead of people evolving and becoming more intelligent we are devolving and becoming less intelligent?

 

[07pilt]

No instead of people evolving and becoming more intelligent we are devolving and becoming less intelligent?

Or encouraging those will lower intelligence to pursue higher education?

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Or encouraging those will lower intelligence to pursue higher education?

Valid point

 

[davidallen]

Can't really answer for you, but can say we pay out the nose here and it works.

The "Local Option" component of our property taxes are $1.07 per $1,000 assessed value (3x what your guys are asking for) with 575 enrolled kids in the district. About 120 of those are tuition payers (out of district enrollees fill the gap each year for $12k per head) with a foundation that does provide scholarships for those in need. The parent community raises roughly $1 mln per year - with families encouraged to donate $2,000 per head. In all, we spend roughtly $14k per kid per year.

We have 8 non classroom staff members to 60 classroom staff. Parents serve lunch on a voluneteer basis to try and keep classroom ratios low (10:1 right now). This is a small community with a very active parent teacher organization. The adminstration is tied into the community at an intimate level. The superintendent sought us out on day one to introduce herself. Knowing that I had previously served on the Board of Trustees of our kids previous school she asked if I would be interested in some committee assignments for the School Board.

We have the highest scores in the state (public and private). Some of that is demographics, but money does work. It just takes an obscene amount of it and a community dedicated to watching how it is used.

Having worked around education in the past - some good Houston ISD stories from the Rod Paige days and the early precursors of No Child Left Behind - I am delighted and know full well what we are experiencing is an anomoly - that most kids will not get the benefit that my kids are getting in public education...

 

[poke2001]

Can't really answer for you, but can say we pay out the nose here and it works.

The "Local Option" component of our property taxes are $1.07 per $1,000 assessed value (3x what your guys are asking for) with 575 enrolled kids in the district. About 120 of those are tuition payers (out of district enrollees fill the gap each year for $12k per head) with a foundation that does provide scholarships for those in need. The parent community raises roughly $1 mln per year - with families encouraged to donate $2,000 per head. In all, we spend roughtly $14k per kid per year.

We have 8 non classroom staff members to 60 classroom staff. Parents serve lunch on a voluneteer basis to try and keep classroom ratios low (10:1 right now). This is a small community with a very active parent teacher organization. The adminstration is tied into the community at an intimate level. The superintendent sought us out on day one to introduce herself. Knowing that I had previously served on the Board of Trustees of our kids previous school she asked if I would be interested in some committee assignments for the School Board.

We have the highest scores in the state (public and private). Some of that is demographics, but money does work. It just takes an obscene amount of it and a community dedicated to watching how it is used.

Having worked around education in the past - some good Houston ISD stories from the Rod Paige days and the early precursors of No Child Left Behind - I am delighted and know full well what we are experiencing is an anomoly - that most kids will not get the benefit that my kids are getting in public education...

Your community sounds amazing. I wouldn't have a problem pumping more money into a system that has parents that care like that. That said, I think the reason you have high scores is far more about demographics and the parental involvement than the cash spent per student.

I'm guessing those students get education outside the classroom as well, and parents that sit down with their children while they do homework and actually help them when they struggle.

When you go to schools that don't have that sort of population, no amount of money in the school can help.

 

[davidallen]

... parents that sit down with their children while they do homework and actually help them when they struggle...

...all but a few of us slackers who spend too much time on an obscure message board railing about politics that is...

We are genuinely grateful, took a couple of years to engineer it, but we made the move to this neighborhood entirely because of the schools.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

we made the move to this neighborhood entirely because of the schools.

Elitist snob.

 

[TPOKE]

It's not a big revelation that kids who are raised in wealthier districts have a more stable home life and perform better in school. I live in a smaller town where the students at the 8 elementary schools (2 private being Catholic and non denominational) are basically the same, coming from near poverty to upper class. The kids who come from the wealthier homes or go to the private schools perform better as a whole. I agree bvillepoker, throwing money at a flawed system won't fix the problem.

For the record, my wife is an elementary teacher and sees it every day.

 

[Headhunter]

. I live in a smaller town where the students at the 8 elementary schools (2 private being Catholic and non denominational) are basically the same, coming from near poverty to upper class.

8 elementary schools is a "smaller town"? Are these one room schools?

 

[TPOKE]

6 public elementary schools. Population around 13,000, median household income is $14,000 less than the state average. 1 middle school and 1 high school. Rapidly becoming welfare laden town because it's cheap to live here. Lower income families rarely get involved with schools but expect everything for free. Don't have enrollment fees because it's unfair to those who can't afford it. 75% on free or reduced lunch. Free breakfast and lunch at middle school during summer for those lazy assed parents who won't fix it. And a lot of unruly messed up kids primarily due to crappy parenting. So, let's throw more money at them so they can get more freebies.

It's time to use the money for education and not social programs. Hold these parents feet to the fire and make them step up. I would start by getting rid of free breakfast at the schools. Maybe having to spend $15 a week on milk and cereal cuts into the booze, pot and cigarette funds too much.

 

[WCPoke]

My town is voting tomorrow on a school bond that totals to about $36/$100,00 property tax. I know all the reasons to vote for it. I know the state has cut their funding this year. I know there are some dire maintenance and spending needs for text books, teacher salaries, etc etc. I have three basic problems with the proposed bond. First, I think they are still top heavy in administration in the school district and they have made some questionable spends in the last 3 years building new facilities and renovating existing ones. Second, they are proposing this bond to pay for the things that they cannot use the state money on so that they can use a larger percentage of the state funds for the things it will be allowed to spend for with state money. That seems a little bit like like sideways accounting, but yet totally legit and legal for them to do. I can get past that one. But third, and most of the issue for me, is that I think this would be pumping more money in to an inherently flawed system that will never provide the optimal results for the issues surrounding public education. I do not believe more money is going to fix anything or make anything better in our school district and they bill it as a stop gap fix for state budget shortfalls that will never be given back. This bond issue is just propping up a failing and dieing system.

Schools and child welfare issues always get my support ($$$). Seems like we cut from the 2 areas that are most important...especially in OK. Teacher pay is low. Classroom sizes are large. In addition, Oklahoma appears to be heading towards an economic dust bowl.

I'm not sure if your bond is perfect, but what other solution is available? Stories abound of teacher layoffs and other critical needs in Oklahoma schools.[/QUOTE]

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

I think we put to much emphasis in brick and mortar and not on incentivizing teachers. If the OEA came out tomorrow and said double the salaries of the teachers with highest test score improvements from the prior year, it would totally change my opinion of them. I want to hear a professional educator offer a way to objectively evaluate teacher performance.

I have talked to countless schoolteachers that are republicans. Now they bitch because public education isn't adequately funded? What'd they think would happen, more money with conservative government?!?

 

[long-duc-dong]

I have talked to countless schoolteachers that are republicans.

Sure you have. Decent post until you started with your usual repub/conserv drivel. Try a new shtick.

 

[MegaPoke]

I think we put to much emphasis in brick and mortar and not on incentivizing teachers. If the OEA came out tomorrow and said double the salaries of the teachers with highest test score improvements from the prior year, it would totally change my opinion of them. I want to hear a professional educator offer a way to objectively evaluate teacher performance.

I have talked to countless schoolteachers that are republicans. Now they bitch because public education isn't adequately funded? What'd they think would happen, more money with conservative government?!?

You are a killer of intellectual discourse. Every time.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

You are a killer of intellectual discourse. Every time.

Maybe you should engage in lieu of just bitching? If hearing something you disagree with kills "intellectual discourse" then you should look inward.

 

[MegaPoke]

Maybe you should engage in lieu of just bitching? If hearing something you disagree with kills "intellectual discourse" then you should look inward.

Nah.

 

[OK State Fan]

Government run schools are a disaster. OK gets a decent bang for the buck, but imho we need to consolidate schools and cut admin cost. I won't vote for any school tax until we make huge changes.

 

[WCPoke]

My town is voting tomorrow on a school bond that totals to about $36/$100,00 property tax. I know all the reasons to vote for it. I know the state has cut their funding this year. I know there are some dire maintenance and spending needs for text books, teacher salaries, etc etc. I have three basic problems with the proposed bond. First, I think they are still top heavy in administration in the school district and they have made some questionable spends in the last 3 years building new facilities and renovating existing ones. Second, they are proposing this bond to pay for the things that they cannot use the state money on so that they can use a larger percentage of the state funds for the things it will be allowed to spend for with state money. That seems a little bit like like sideways accounting, but yet totally legit and legal for them to do. I can get past that one. But third, and most of the issue for me, is that I think this would be pumping more money in to an inherently flawed system that will never provide the optimal results for the issues surrounding public education. I do not believe more money is going to fix anything or make anything better in our school district and they bill it as a stop gap fix for state budget shortfalls that will never be given back. This bond issue is just propping up a failing and dieing system.

Did you win?

 

[SMemmett]

6 public elementary schools. Population around 13,000, median household income is $14,000 less than the state average. 1 middle school and 1 high school. Rapidly becoming welfare laden town because it's cheap to live here. Lower income families rarely get involved with schools but expect everything for free. Don't have enrollment fees because it's unfair to those who can't afford it. 75% on free or reduced lunch. Free breakfast and lunch at middle school during summer for those lazy assed parents who won't fix it. And a lot of unruly messed up kids primarily due to crappy parenting. So, let's throw more money at them so they can get more freebies.

It's time to use the money for education and not social programs. Hold these parents feet to the fire and make them step up. I would start by getting rid of free breakfast at the schools. Maybe having to spend $15 a week on milk and cereal cuts into the booze, pot and cigarette funds too much.

Damn straight, It'll be a cold day in hell before some underfed, underdeveloped, malnourished 6 year old gets a bowl of cereal for breakfast and a cheese sandwich at lunch because his parents are neglectful, poverty stricken drug addicts, on my dime.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Damned right. 6 year olds are gonna have to EARN those apple slices. I'm tired of their sense of entitlement.

Until it works MY way - and I mean a revamp of everything - I'm not paying shit for those kids. (Anti-tax rationalization # 3(b)). That includes the expensive school bus tires. Until they take bids on those tires I'm not throwing any more money at government.

 

[TPOKE]

Damn straight, It'll be a cold day in hell before some underfed, underdeveloped, malnourished 6 year old gets a bowl of cereal for breakfast and a cheese sandwich at lunch because his parents are neglectful, poverty stricken drug addicts, on my dime.

Swing and a miss. Totally missed the point.

 

[07pilt]

Damn straight, It'll be a cold day in hell before some underfed, underdeveloped, malnourished 6 year old gets a bowl of cereal for breakfast and a cheese sandwich at lunch because his parents are neglectful, poverty stricken drug addicts, on my dime.

I mean if you really think about it, if we quit feeding those kids their parents will probably pick up the slack and just sacrifice their booze and cigarettes budget. Really, assisting needy children in any way is just subsidizing addiction.

 

[mseabolt]

I mean if you really think about it, if we quit feeding those kids their parents will probably pick up the slack and just sacrifice their booze and cigarettes budget. Really, assisting needy children in any way is just subsidizing addiction.

They then can really work on this as a pro choice matter for post birth abortions, right? Still affecting a females body by keeping her away from booze and cigarettes.

 

[BvillePoker]

Damn straight, It'll be a cold day in hell before some underfed, underdeveloped, malnourished 6 year old gets a bowl of cereal for breakfast and a cheese sandwich at lunch because his parents are neglectful, poverty stricken drug addicts, on my dime.

 

[BvillePoker]

Did you win?

It was not really a "win" or "lose" situation. The school bond passed. $20 Million of which I think only %17 of actually has a minimal chance of raising student performance. On the brightside, $6MM for facilities projects should mean that the kids will be performing at the same level in really nice looking buildings. I mean the cheer and pom teams NEED an indoor practice facility no matter what the economic downturn of the local city and state is. Even though people are getting laid off and housing prices are falling in the city we do not want the cross country, tennis, and track teams to have to change in the same locker rooms that the basketball players or football players change in.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

It was not really a "win" or "lose" situation. The school bond passed. $20 Million of which I think only %17 of actually has a minimal chance of raising student performance. On the brightside, $6MM for facilities projects should mean that the kids will be performing at the same level in really nice looking buildings. I mean the cheer and pom teams NEED an indoor practice facility no matter what the economic downturn of the local city and state is. Even though people are getting laid off and housing prices are falling in the city we do not want the cross country, tennis, and track teams to have to change in the same locker rooms that the basketball players or football players change in.

At least they didn't drop $70mm on a football stadium.

Why doesn't anyone ever ask for a bond issue to find and fund better teachers?

 

[SMemmett]

Swing and a miss. Totally missed the point.

Then what was the point? Because I guess I missed it. I read your initial post as your solutions to mismanagement of taxpayer money in public education and one of your solutions was to "get(ting) rid of free breakfast at the schools."

That would literally mean some kids do not eat breakfast, because of how heavily they rely on that free meal. And it's not because it cuts into their mom's cigarette budget, it's because their parent (likely just one) is undereducated, grossly neglectful, drug addicted or in many cases a mix of all three. I could see a debate about tightening the definition to who qualifies for free or reduced lunch, but I think to eliminate them would be a very poor decision.

 

[BvillePoker]

The nutrition program for school lunches and breakfasts for low income families is run by the state and not part of the general fund provided to the school districts by the state. Two totally different sources of money. One has NOTHING to do with this other.

 

[squeak]

The food is so bad that if I was a kid I'd be stealing my parents weed and trading it for some decent grub.

 

[MegaPoke]

The food is so bad that if I was a kid I'd be stealing my parents weed and trading it for some decent grub.

That's a good way to get grounded at my house, mister.

 

[TPOKE]

Then what was the point? Because I guess I missed it. I read your initial post as your solutions to mismanagement of taxpayer money in public education and one of your solutions was to "get(ting) rid of free breakfast at the schools."

That would literally mean some kids do not eat breakfast, because of how heavily they rely on that free meal. And it's not because it cuts into their mom's cigarette budget, it's because their parent (likely just one) is undereducated, grossly neglectful, drug addicted or in many cases a mix of all three. I could see a debate about tightening the definition to who qualifies for free or reduced lunch, but I think to eliminate them would be a very poor decision.

Great Post. Yes I did say get rid of school school breakfast, not because I want to see kids go hungry, but parents need to become more accountable and raise their children. Why not cook them supper at the school at 5pm? It's not difficult to put a couple of boxes of cereal and milk on a table, or cook scrambled eggs and toast. People will take advantage of anything that's free, especially if it involves food. You take it away, they'll change. It may take a heavy hand, but they will. I promise you, there's more than enough money on food stamps for them to do it. It would also build a stronger bond between child and parent. On the other hand, I have no problem with free or reduced lunches. I do think there are many who take advantage of it that shouldn't. As I've posted at other times on this board, I'm for assistance to anyone who is making an effort to get ahead, but having a hard time making ends meet. I also agree with your take above on tightening the definition of qualifies, another great point.

You're 100% correct on the parental problem, and this part is my biggest problem with not only this, but about almost every social issue. Government thinks they can fix everything, and over the last 40 years the family unit has broken down so terribly bad that they've been forced to step in. Even though the intentions were good, it's created a slippery slope that it's either going to get worse, or some painful, probably very painful, changes will need to happen.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Great Post. Yes I did say get rid of school school breakfast, not because I want to see kids go hungry, but parents need to become more accountable and raise their children. Why not cook them supper at the school at 5pm? It's not difficult to put a couple of boxes of cereal and milk on a table, or cook scrambled eggs and toast. People will take advantage of anything that's free, especially if it involves food. You take it away, they'll change. It may take a heavy hand, but they will. I promise you, there's more than enough money on food stamps for them to do it. It would also build a stronger bond between child and parent. On the other hand, I have no problem with free or reduced lunches. I do think there are many who take advantage of it that shouldn't. As I've posted at other times on this board, I'm for assistance to anyone who is making an effort to get ahead, but having a hard time making ends meet. I also agree with your take above on tightening the definition of qualifies, another great point.

You're 100% correct on the parental problem, and this part is my biggest problem with not only this, but about almost every social issue. Government thinks they can fix everything, and over the last 40 years the family unit has broken down so terribly bad that they've been forced to step in. Even though the intentions were good, it's created a slippery slope that it's either going to get worse, or some painful, probably very painful, changes will need to happen.

Were you brought up poor?

 

[Ostatedchi]

The problem with social welfare systems is that it reduces the predictable negative consequences of poor choices. That in turn allows people to continue to make poorer and poorer decisions. That causes people to continue to vote in elected officials who'll perpetuate the system of handouts in order for the poor decision makers to continue to live off of the government teat.

It also robs people of the opportunity to be more charitable.

 

[JimmyBob]

The problem with social welfare systems is that it reduces the predictable negative consequences of poor choices. That in turn allows people to continue to make poorer and poorer decisions. That causes people to continue to vote in elected officials who'll perpetuate the system of handouts in order for the poor decision makers to continue to live off of the government teat.

It also robs people of the opportunity to be more charitable.

Bingo! I hate to sound like a cynical "mature" person, but I'm afraid the US has passed the tipping point (think Guam) to ever undo the last eight years of social welfare on steroids.

 

[squeak]

The problem with social welfare systems is that it reduces the predictable negative consequences of poor choices. That in turn allows people to continue to make poorer and poorer decisions. That causes people to continue to vote in elected officials who'll perpetuate the system of handouts in order for the poor decision makers to continue to live off of the government teat.

It also robs people of the opportunity to be more charitable.

Nobody wants a kid to go hungry but I agree. I think many on the left, however, believe certain adults/parents are unable to "pick up the slack" no matter what and hand outs, or the lack thereof, won't make any difference in their behavior.

 

[HighStickHarry]

Did anyone ever think that maybe food stamps should only buy produce, meat or whole grains? I know you can program the registers to do it because they reject cigarettes, deli items and other specific items right now.

I sacked groceries in hs and college and I watched people put back healthy stuff when their cards petered out before their cart was empty.