Texas School Finance Trial & Robin Hood discussion thread (Dallas: credit, layoffs)

[TX75007]

Originally Posted by Cathy4017

Exactly. My home county has to pay, also, and it's hard not to resent it. The district in which my sister taught for years also had to do the same. They couldn't afford some items because the money went to districts that didn't pay nearly so much in property taxes.

It's socialistic and basically unfair, but it is what it is.

The alternative is far worse.

Huge downstream social costs and a large population unable to carry their own weight as adults and then another set of kids to educate using the same or shrinking tax base. Add in politicians manipulating an uneducated and resentful population to seize the wealth of the Anglo/Tejano population while the violenace spills over the border and its the worst of all possible worlds.

Good or bad, many Mexicans fled the horrible conditions in Mexico for the US. The alternative was a bloodbath south of the border.

All these new, highly educated Texans will be a HUGE benefit to us in the next few years. Patience.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by TX75007

The alternative is far worse.

Huge downstream social costs and a large population unable to carry their own weight as adults and then another set of kids to educate using the same or shrinking tax base. Add in politicians manipulating an uneducated and resentful population to seize the wealth of the Anglo/Tejano population while the violenace spills over the border and its the worst of all possible worlds.

Good or bad, many Mexicans fled the horrible conditions in Mexico for the US. The alternative was a bloodbath south of the border.

All these new, highly educated Texans will be a HUGE benefit to us in the next few years. Patience.

It's bad all the way around. The so-called benefit won't accrue in my lifetime (I'm 61 years old, and a taxpayer), and it might in yours if you're young enough, like in your mid-teens or younger, which you most likely aren't.

But Hispanics have typically had the lowest graduation rates of any group, especially if they are recent Mexican/Central/South American immigrants. They obviously are hindered by their lack of English proficiency. This drags down the whole system, costs us extra money and penalizes native/legal Texan citizens' kids all across the board.

Talk about an albatross......the points that Hoffdano brought up are very relevant. From his post above:

Why are the "bad" schools still "bad?" Because the demographics say so. Like it or not, certain demographics groups continually demonstrate that their kids don't go to class, the social pressure is towards not caring about grades, and the family structures inhibit learning. Without fixing those problems spending more and more money in the classroom is just a waste.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Please don't cite nearly useless data points such as 47th in per pupil funding. Un-adjusted for cost of living (these figures always are) those figures cannot be used to determine if Texas is spending an appropriate amount.

Wash DC spends 50% more per student than Texas does. Yet its achievement is dramatically worse across the board.

Massachusetts spends far more per student too and its achievement is better than Texas. Yet if the data is broken down by demographic group, MA is only slightly better for white kids, and about equal or even slightly worse for non-white children. In spite of far higher spending.

I support some level of equalization across the state. I want an adequate level of K-12 education available, even in property poor areas. That doesn't mean equal though - because I also believe that parents who have more, fully have the right to spend more, on their children's education. One of today's problems with Chapter 41 today is that property tax rates are capped - which means wealthy school districts CAN'T spend more on their schools unless it is done by donations outside the tax systems.

There is a huge amount of data that shows spending more money doesn't per se FIX poor schools. Austin ISD spends much more per student in the poor performing schools than it does on the top per performing campuses. Why are the "bad" schools still "bad?" Because the demographics say so. Like it or not, certain demographics groups continually demonstrate that their kids don't go to class, the social pressure is towards not caring about grades, and the family structures inhibit learning. Without fixing those problems spending more and more money in the classroom is just a waste.

Falconheadwest - you cite a common misrepresentation of the impact of Robin Hood to LTISD. 47% of your school taxes are not sent out of district. 47% of the Maintenance & Operations portion is sent out of state. 0% of the tax rate spent to repay bonds is sent out of district. Of the 1.32% spent on LTISD taxes in total, 1.04% is M&O, of which 53% is retained by the district.

As for athletics, some schools districts spend a gaudy amount of money on sports. Allen ISD spent $60M on their new stadium. But that is voter supported bond money. Although I would vote against that in my school district, I respect that Allen ISDs voters supported it. I strongly support local control.

STANDING OVATION POST!

[hoffdano]

The ruling is in. The current system for funding public schools in Texas does not satisfy the Texas Constitution.

So now we will see how the legislature responds and what the remedies are.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

The ruling is in. The current system for funding public schools in Texas does not satisfy the Texas Constitution.

So now we will see how the legislature responds and what the remedies are.

I just hope they don't come up with something worse than RH....

[HappyTexan]

The poor rural schools are going to hurt from this.
They can't afford to have smart boards in every classroom and laptops and the latest software installed if they had to exist on their own budgets.
As it is, even with RH funding, they don't' have curriculum specialists or full time classroom aids or even fancy football stadiums. Every kid doesn't have a laptop and the school I'm in still has 386 desktops in the single lab for the entire middle school to share.

But RH funding allowed them to have smart boards in every classroom, subscriptions to CSCOPE, a set of chrome books to share as well as calculators for 8th grade math and Algebra.

Take away that extra funding and you're putting a big dent in making a fair playing ground in schools so that all kids have a fair chance.

[FalconheadWest]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Falconheadwest - you cite a common misrepresentation of the impact of Robin Hood to LTISD. 47% of your school taxes are not sent out of district. 47% of the Maintenance & Operations portion is sent out of state. 0% of the tax rate spent to repay bonds is sent out of district. Of the 1.32% spent on LTISD taxes in total, 1.04% is M&O, of which 53% is retained by the district.

A friend of mine works for the administration and has told me it's 49%, but even if you want to mince the numbers, what's the difference between 47% and 49%? That's still basically HALF my tax dollars going elsewhere outside of LTISD, and that's ridiculous.

And to just do bond after bond to keep more money? How about reducing the actual school tax so the 49% is a lesser amount, and then ask for more bond money. Don't keep asking me for more and more bond money when the other 49% of the "regular" tax is leaving the area and that tax burden is not being reduced to offset the bond money.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by FalconheadWest

A friend of mine works for the administration and has told me it's 49%, but even if you want to mince the numbers, what's the difference between 47% and 49%? That's still basically HALF my tax dollars going elsewhere outside of LTISD, and that's ridiculous.

And to just do bond after bond to keep more money? How about reducing the actual school tax so the 49% is a lesser amount, and then ask for more bond money. Don't keep asking me for more and more bond money when the other 49% of the "regular" tax is leaving the area and that tax burden is not being reduced to offset the bond money.

The key isn't 49% or 47%. The key is that only M&O funds are subject to Robin Hood. Half your tax dollars ARE NOT leaving the district. For 2011-2012, you paid 1.32% total. Of that, .28% is related to debt service. Of the remaining 1.04%, 47% was sent out of district.

So (.47 x 1.04) = .49 of a total of 1.32%. So (.49/1.32) = 37% of your LTISD property taxes left the district.

I don't like that number BTW. But you should get your facts straight and not misrepresent how this works.

Bond / Tax Information

As for bond money - by law it can only be used for specific purposes. Usually construction, capital equipment, and other items with long life. It cannot be used for employee salaries, utilities, etc. And school districts cannot borrow money (issue bonds) without voter approval. LTISD pays for as much as it can by law with bond money because it limits the funds that leave the district via Chapter 41.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

The poor rural schools are going to hurt from this.
They can't afford to have smart boards in every classroom and laptops and the latest software installed if they had to exist on their own budgets.
As it is, even with RH funding, they don't' have curriculum specialists or full time classroom aids or even fancy football stadiums. Every kid doesn't have a laptop and the school I'm in still has 386 desktops in the single lab for the entire middle school to share.

But RH funding allowed them to have smart boards in every classroom, subscriptions to CSCOPE, a set of chrome books to share as well as calculators for 8th grade math and Algebra.

Take away that extra funding and you're putting a big dent in making a fair playing ground in schools so that all kids have a fair chance.

"Rich" schools don't give their kids laptops. A few do, but most do not. Here in the Austin area I believe Westlake HS is experimenting with iPads. Lake Travis HS does not issue students any electronic equipment. They are now issuing tablets to some teachers and some administrators (instead of laptops).

The court ruling merely said the state is not meeting its constitutional requirements. That doesn't mean rural or poor districts will have less money. I think it is likely they may have more - it just means the existing Robin Hood scheme will not fund it.

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

As for athletics, some schools districts spend a gaudy amount of money on sports. Allen ISD spent $60M on their new stadium. But that is voter supported bond money. Although I would vote against that in my school district, I respect that Allen ISDs voters supported it. I strongly support local control.

There's a serious problem with overspending in school athletics
that's why I will never support HS football.

I can't believe that a HS in Texas did this at the same time that teachers were being layoff all over the state.



New Braunfels Canyon High School