School aid formula being considered creates winners, losers in PA (Washington: real estate, 2015)

[villageidiot1]

This looks like it will result in more real estate tax increases and further expense cutting at most school districts in Western PA.

A new public school funding formula being considered by the state legislature would create winners and losers as it seeks a way to link the distribution of state aid more closely to need. Shrinking school districts that were previously spared aid cutbacks — many in western Pennsylvania would see their share of aid come in lower under the proposed new formula.

10 COUNTIES WITH BIGGEST LOSS IN PERCENTAGE SHARE (in order of biggest loss)
Westmoreland
Washington
Beaver
Cambria
Blair
Allegheny
Butler
Fayette
Indiana
Somerset

EXPLANATION: The counties with the biggest proposed loss in share of school dollars are in western Pennsylvania, where the state’s biggest population losses have occurred.

See School aid formula being considered creates winners, losers in Pa. for more details.

This new funding formula seems to have considerable support around the state since it is viewed as more equitable. See School funding formula will boost Pa. economy

[stburr91]

Two things from the article.

SHARE OF WINNERS, LOSERS

All told, 162 districts would get a bigger share of aid that is distributed through the new formula compared to the share of aid the districts received this year, the AP found. Nearly twice as many, 308, would get a smaller share; 30 would see no difference.

No district’s aid would drop below the amount it now receives even if it continues to shrink.

How can a district lose if it will never receive less that it gets now? I would bet the aid is adjusted for inflation.

Rand senior economist Lynn Karoly previewed the research for legislators, business and labor leaders, and education policymakers and advocates in May. She estimated that Pennsylvania would have realized as much as $44 billion more in economic growth over the last 10 years, and our students would have been at the top of U.S. and world rankings, if our educational system had closed gaps in test scores based on differences in family economic status, students' race and ethnicity, and parental education.

Where do people get this stuff? No district in the last 50 years has found a way to close the achievement gaps, how is this plan going to do it? Even if you could close the gaps, where are these good paying jobs that would create this $44 billion going to come from? There is no reason to believe that there will be a large increase in good paying jobs. In fact, there is no reason to think that wages are going to do anything but continue to stagnate, or go down for most Americans.

[villageidiot1]

Originally Posted by stburr91

Two things from the article.

How can a district lose if it will never receive less that it gets now? I would bet the aid is adjusted for inflation.


Where do people get this stuff? No district in the last 50 years has found a way to close the achievement gaps, how is this plan going to do it? Even if you could close the gaps, where are these good paying jobs that would create this $44 billion going to come from? There is no reason to believe that there will be a large increase in good paying jobs. In fact, there is no reason to think that wages are going to do anything but continue to stagnate, or go down for most Americans.

The problem is the funding for teachers' pensions. According to this article: Pension obligations take toll on school districts | TribLIVE funding for pension obligations have soared by nearly 60 percent since 2013-14, going from $1.8 billion to $2.9 billion for the coming school year.

In regard to your second point, I agree. Any analysis that shows $44 billion more in economic growth over the last 10 years due to improvements in education is simply voodoo economics. I wonder if Rand senior economist Lynn Karoly's research showed what sector of the economy those jobs would have been located.