[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

These are great points. After the last budget go around, the best performing districts are receiving little if any state funding, especially relative to the poor performing urban districts. And I don't have a problem with that. But the idea that the state is also going to dictate the size and composition based on some arbitrary criteria that has nothing to do with school performance (and when they provide little to no funding) is asinine. And you're right that there are ulterior motives at play here.

Looks to me like the GA Leadership is trying a two-front pressure campaign on the Teachers Unions and the Suburban Municipal Administrations. Like a shot across the bow to get the leadership of the towns to go on record to endorse higher property taxes than already assessed and let the TUs feel that a few sacred cows are able to be slaughtered.

There's zero chance this even gets to the floor in it's current form, and personally I'm against it as it stands. But there's going to have to be movement and compromise from these two very powerful interest groups to help the state thrive (which actually helps those towns, not incidentally). As well, the idea that's there's some mystical giant pool of state money going to "undeserving folks" needs to wane because when looking at the facts it is based in as much reality as saying that Giant Unicorns are the cause of our budget issues.

The question is for those that complain constantly about the high taxes is what way do we actually go about solving it with a grip on the fact based source of the issues?

[hvexpatinct]

Originally Posted by beerisgood02

Shocking that Torrington is all for this. Absolutely shocking.

Torrington is looking at Litchfield with dollar signs in its eyes.

[East of the River]

Well I think this would save a substantial amount of money. As the state runs the teachers pensions even towns that funded by local tax have an impact on the state budget. The judgement call will be how much will achievement be affected by the change. I think it might be worth a shot as a trial at least, the potential budget impacts are quite large. But I agree we don't want to completely destroy the good parts of our existing schools.
If you want to force regionalism it might work better to start with things like police and fire and maintenance crews.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by hvexpatinct

Torrington is looking at Litchfield with dollar signs in its eyes.

The way I read this Litchfield would join another system but would not have to Join Torrington.

[beerisgood02]

Originally Posted by hvexpatinct

Torrington is looking at Litchfield with dollar signs in its eyes.

Precisely

[Lalalally]

There are apparently multiple bills before our state house to act on. It seems the one targeting districts with less than 2,000 students is the least evil of them all.
The most? The one one that targets towns with less than 40,000 residents — they too apparently should join and regionilize with their nearest large town a/k/a, by Connecticut standards, “city.”
Irrespective of the fact that CT “cities,” 9 out of 10 times entirely suck ass...

[beerisgood02]

Originally Posted by Lalalally

There are apparently multiple bills before our state house to act on. It seems the one targeting districts with less than 2,000 students is the least evil of them all.
The most? The one one that targets towns with less than 40,000 residents — they too apparently should join and regionilize with their nearest large town a/k/a, by Connecticut standards, “city.”
Irrespective of the fact that CT “cities,” 9 out of 10 times entirely suck ass...

Thankfully Westport has 5,500 students although I highly doubt either bill gets through the door.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by East of the River

Well I think this would save a substantial amount of money. As the state runs the teachers pensions even towns that funded by local tax have an impact on the state budget. The judgement call will be how much will achievement be affected by the change. I think it might be worth a shot as a trial at least, the potential budget impacts are quite large. But I agree we don't want to completely destroy the good parts of our existing schools.
If you want to force regionalism it might work better to start with things like police and fire and maintenance crews.

Why not move the teachers pensions to the municipalities? It allows the wealthy suburbs to gold plate them if they want to on their own dime.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Why not move the teachers pensions to the municipalities? It allows the wealthy suburbs to gold plate them if they want to on their own dime.

You could in theory but I'm not sure at the moment even the gold plated communities could handle that under current property tax levels. It would have to be a slow handover.

[NUHuskies01]

Originally Posted by SAE72

Jay, why does it surprise you that Democrats would propose solutions to problems that don't even exist ?
Nearly everything lately that they touch is based on their quest for power and their perception of what ails CT, and on the grand scale, the entire country.

Wait, so you will complain about taxes being to high, and then when the Democrats propose something that COULD potentially fix it a little bit, there is a problem that does not exist?

I hate this idea myself, but hey, they are addressing a problem.

I kinda of get the idea that schools with less then thirty kids in it, that is an issue. But what has not been put on here is how many communities this would effect, and how the 2000 number came to be.

I am part of the problem here, complaining about something without knowing 100% of the facts.

But you want it both ways here. Slam a political party for the sake of slamming it. Come with something else.