Texas School Finance Trial & Robin Hood discussion thread (Austin: home, school districts)

[LizzySWW]

Share your thoughts on the trial and Robin Hood.

The press often mentions:

overspending on athletic facilities
fairness of Robin Hood
padded salaries at the top
rising cost of educating poor immigrant children
ESL services
charter schools
voucher debate
need for a new school tax system

Has Robin Hood helped in your opinion? Will our school finances always be in trouble or can we turn this around?

[TX75007]

Robin Hood was a grand bargain to educate the Hispanic population in TX in ISDs with little or no tax base.

How has it done?

Texas is near the top in HS graduation rates for all groups. And the Hispanic test scores are near the top as well.

I agree that there are abuses, but Robin Hood has achieved its objective beyond anyone's expectations.

As the oil boom expands and the Hispanic population matures and begins to make money, Robin Hood will see an adjustment. I also think that an expansion of Charter Schools, which cost far less to educate, will also be expanded.

The Legislature will make adjustments as time goes on and revenue mix changes.

[padcrasher]

Who isn't against making processes more cost effective? Who is against stopping unnecessary expenditures?

It's all money. And however it's collected, (property taxes, income taxes, lottery profits, etc) the right wing in Texas want to lower the burden on the wealthy in funding public education. That's what this is all about. And at it's core it's racism. They have their mostly white suburban school districts, (some where poor people are virtually completely absent, ie Southlake Carroll ISD, Highland Park ISD, etc) and they want their money to only go to their kids. A survival of the fittest, dog-eat-dog, mentality.

And despite Robin Hood they've mostly been able to preserve the the fact their kids are better educated. If they don't send them to exclusive private schools, they pay for extra tutoring, extra coaching, not for remedial work, but for advanced lessons. And now they are lobbying that their private schools be allowed into the UIL, and that they receive a tax break for pulling their kids out of the public schools system.

That gap between rich and poor is the greatest in our nation's history. The USA now has the lowest social mobility rates in the western industrialized world. And getting rid of Robin Hood is just another way they can preserve their elite status for their kids.

[FalconheadWest]

I'm not against Robin Hood, per se, but I think the districts should have a cap of what they contribute because why shouldn't funds stay in a district where the people are paying it? My district pays 49% to Robin Hood. Yes, 49% of my school taxes go out of the area. That's absurd. The schools in my district need ipads and updated things in the class rooms as well, but we can't afford it because 49% of the funds go elsewhere. The kids are constantly doing fund raisers, and they shouldn't have to spend so much time raising money when we've already paid it.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by FalconheadWest

I'm not against Robin Hood, per se, but I think the districts should have a cap of what they contribute because why shouldn't funds stay in a district where the people are paying it? My district pays 49% to Robin Hood. Yes, 49% of my school taxes go out of the area. That's absurd. The schools in my district need ipads and updated things in the class rooms as well, but we can't afford it because 49% of the funds go elsewhere. The kids are constantly doing fund raisers, and they shouldn't have to spend so much time raising money when we've already paid it.

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.

[88txaggie]

Athletic improvements are covered by bond elections, I believe.

they want their money to only go to their kids.

of course 'they' do! Why shouldn't the $ you earn go to feed, clothe, and educate your children?

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by 88txaggie

Athletic improvements are covered by bond elections, I believe.



of course 'they' do! Why shouldn't the $ you earn go to feed, clothe, and educate your children?

Because it's humane to give all kids a basic education. Texas, last time I looked, was 47th in per pupil school funding. Now you want cut the revenue of these poorer districts even more by cutting the tax burden on the wealthier school districts? Or, you just want poor people to pay more for their kids education to make up the difference? It's either one or the other. And by the way you poor thing, this is about education, not feeding and clothing their kids, so stop with the drama. Progressive tax rates are standard practice all over the westernized, industrialized World, and have been for many Decades, but only in the US do we have this cult of white, right wingers bent on destroying the social safety net just to deny brown people a government benefit.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

......Progressive tax rates are standard practice all over the westernized, industrialized World, and have been for many Decades, but only in the US do we have this cult of white, right wingers bent on destroying the social safety net just to deny brown people a government benefit.

The real problem is having to educate non-citizens the same as citizens. That's one of the main issues I have with it.

If we did away with birthright citizenship (children born in the US of illegal alien parents) and having to educate non-citizens at the expense of citizen taxpayers (Plyler vs Doe), much of this would go away. Mexican children can cross the border every day to go to school in the US, no questions asked.

The US is just about the only country that does this, and we are idiots for doing so.

People move to certain districts because of the schools, and to penalize the property-wealthy districts so that those who pay nothing can have the same benefits.....NOT!

[crbcrbrgv]

If Perry gets his wish with charter schools, our finances for education are doomed.

Fight this first, then come back to the table to figure everything out.

Robbing Paul to pay Peter never works.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Because it's humane to give all kids a basic education. Texas, last time I looked, was 47th in per pupil school funding. Now you want cut the revenue of these poorer districts even more by cutting the tax burden on the wealthier school districts? Or, you just want poor people to pay more for their kids education to make up the difference? It's either one or the other. And by the way you poor thing, this is about education, not feeding and clothing their kids, so stop with the drama. Progressive tax rates are standard practice all over the westernized, industrialized World, and have been for many Decades, but only in the US do we have this cult of white, right wingers bent on destroying the social safety net just to deny brown people a government benefit.

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.