Walton County School Board budget discussion

I attended but my head hurts from 2 hours of numbers and talking about the potential cuts. I have 5 pages of notes. I will try and post more details later, and I sure it will be in the paper.

In a nutshell- we need to find $8 million. It is ugly. And before people start screaming about where the money is going or that it is not being spent wisely, they need to remember that revenues are waaaay down, and probably aren't going to come up anytime soon, and we are working with a lot less money than in the past. Our system already seems pretty bare bones to me- we don't have a lot of the bells and whistles we were accustomed to in a larger metro school system, so I am going nuts at the thought of cutting back even more.

The budget workshop will continue on Mar. 10th, at Walton High School (we were packed into the Board of Ed room tonight), and Mar. 24th will be the "decision day" for the budget since there is a deadline of March 31st (for a reason that I can't recall).

I attended this workshop because I am interested in the "education delivery model" switch for high school- going back to a traditional 7 period schedule from the 4 by 4 block schedule that currently is not working well. Other schools have been switching back in droves, and we need to as well. All principals but one seem to be in favor of going back to the traditional schedule and are very anxious to start working on the next year's schedules, since it will take some real work to rearrange. There was no huge opposition to switching back, so principals were instructed to go ahead and work on schedules, and the official vote will be Mar. 24th.


Ready for some revolting figures for our state? (from Carlene Anderson's presentation)~

Florida is

47th in expenditures per person in K-12 education
47th in expenditures per student in k-12 education
50th in personal income spent on public schools

Shameful.

She asked that we let our legislators know :
that we support public school funding,

that we are appalled at Florida's funding of public education,

and we don't want to be 50th anymore, and let others know what the education funding picture looks like in Florida and Walton County.

I am cooked now- goodnight!

Yes, and according to recent news, Florida has reduced spending on schools below 2006 levels which our wildly popular Governor is asking for a waiver from the Feds so Florida can recieve some of the Stimulus money for education and almost in the same breath wants to reduce property taxes by 3%. Go figure.

Yes, and according to recent news, Florida has reduced spending on schools below 2006 levels which our wildly popular Governor is asking for a waiver from the Feds so Florida can recieve some of the Stimulus money for education and almost in the same breath wants to reduce property taxes by 3%. Go figure.

And we won't get any stimulus money in the first place because of how low we rank in the money spent on students (see my post above).

I heard something interesting the other day- this year the state is uber-funding state colleges and universities, even while the public K-12 is drowning. Don't kids have to go to K-12 before they go to college? I would love to see the funding figures on this if anyone has them handy.

I had seen where Crist was asking for a waiver, was that just Public relations bluster? I had heard we would not qualify either.

I had seen where Crist was asking for a waiver, was that just Public relations bluster? I had heard we would not qualify either.

Yes, we heard this too.

Whether it is a public relations bluster or not, I am sure it is embarrassing to have to ask for this waiver because your state is such a loser educationally!

The superintendent mentioned that even if we were to get stimulus money, it is tied to IDEA (Individuals w/ Disabilities Education Act) and Title I - it is not money that can be used for just anything that is needed. Lots of strings.

I heard something interesting the other day- this year the state is uber-funding state colleges and universities, even while the public K-12 is drowning. Don't kids have to go to K-12 before they go to college? I would love to see the funding figures on this if anyone has them handy.

The state got into a pretty big game of chicken with a couple of flagship universities, who had been chronically underfunded as badly as K-12 has in recent years. U of Florida had cut the target size for its freshman class by about 15% and was threatening another admissions cut. FSU was screaming about how it was losing top professors to places like South Carolina and Tennessee because of the lack of funding, and there have been faculty layoffs and program cuts at most universities.

Add in how higher ed enrollment typically goes up during bad economic times, even when K-12 enrollment goes flat as Florida's population growth stalls, and it's a mess.

The big concession the state made was that the current per head student levels are not sustainable, so schools are now allowed to raise tuition to something close to the national average. The problem with that is that the state then has to fund Bright Futures scholarships at a higher level, so it's not as much of an external funding increase as it should be.

It's probably not going to happen for political reasons, but it would be healthier for higher ed in the long run if the state made Bright Futures more need-based. Let everyone who gets the grades and test scores get the award, but have it just be a nice piece of paper for families making over, say $125K or something.

As for higher ed construction projects, they're largely a slush fund for well-connected political donors and construction companies.

Thanks Beachmouse- I was hoping you would chime in since you seem to have good info on our education system.

I am just a parent and have no technical knowledge on how all of this works, so I appreciate the input of those who have experience in how our public education system is funded. It appears I have a lot to learn, and once again, my eyes have been yanked open.

Good point Beachmouse about how Bright Futures is artificially keeping tuition levels low. At the same time, taking it away from the upper-income folks would be a double whammy: not only would their child not get the financial help that has been promised for years, but tuition is bound to rise very rapidly once fewer people start getting scholarships from the state.

Perhaps a sliding scale is in order based on income, but have everyone who meets the academic standards get something, no matter what the income level. Otherwise I'm sure we would have some good students falling through the funding cracks -- and a heck of a lot of angry parents.

Perhaps a sliding scale is in order based on income, but have everyone who meets the academic standards get something, no matter what the income level. Otherwise I'm sure we would have some good students falling through the funding cracks -- and a heck of a lot of angry parents.

Sliding scale is good. And it would be relatively straightforward to use the existing FASA structure to impliment something like that. Interesting compilation of family income and higher ed in Florida here: (edit- forgot to paste link and now can't find it)
Average family income of students enrolled at:

$20,000-$30,000- Florida A&M
$30,000-$40,000- Barry University
$50,000-$60,000- Saint Leo
$70,000-$80,000- Florida Atlantic, Florida Southern
$80,000-$100,000- Palm Beach Atlantic, Tampa, West Florida, South Florida
$100,000 or more- Ave Maria, Flagler, Florida International, Florida State, Rollins, Central Florida, Florida, North Florida, Miami

FSU was screaming about how it was losing top professors to places like South Carolina and Tennessee

That's funny. I just left a meeting here where TN universities were complaining about losing profs to FL.

go figure?

Also, a lot of children who were infants when the Florida Prepaid College Plans first became wildly popular in the early 1990's are now in, or will soon enter, the state university system. These educations are also funded at a much lower rate, like the Bright Futures scholarships.

Thanks JDARG for attending the meeting last night. I have several comments and observations as a school board member and one of the five folks who will have to make these decisions.

(1) This is really frustrating. We started this school budget year with a 12.0 million dollar budgeted fund balance (budgeted savings account). We must keep at least a 2.5% fund balance. We have absorbed, approximately, a 20% cut in funding since the beginning of this school year through the anticipated funds we are to receive for the 2009-2010 school year. In order to reach that level of funding and have the 2.5% fund balance, we must cut out of our budget for this year (i.e. to start next year) 8.0 million dollars. That is a lot of money.

(2) Just to give you some real numbers, our budget started out with 68 million in revenue for this year. We anticipate starting out with 52 million in revenue next year. It could be 54 million, but, you get the picture.

(3) 85% of that budget is in salaries. Thus, to get to the point where we meet that 54 million dollar revenue stream, we would have to cut or lay off a significant number of positions. The administration's suggestion (i.e., the Superintendent) is to lay off 56 teachers, 26 educational support persons, cut 10% out of the coaching supplements, cut athletic contests by 30%, etc. We asked the administration to look at some other ideas, i.e., a general rollback of salaries by 3% and some other ideas to try to avoid as many layoffs as possible.

(4) As Jenny said, we are gathering all the information for one more workshop and then we will have to make a decision in late March.

(5) The board did decide to authorize the schools to start planning for a seven period day at the high schools (vs. a four by four block schedue). Jenny and disagree to some extent on the need for 4x4, but, it is basically done at this point is my guess.

(6) The numbers and cuts are in the operations side of the budget. Our capital budget is still fairly healthy. We are hoping, after the completion of the new Walton High School, that we can actually start construction of the new Emerald Coast High School. Constructions costs are cheaper now and we have the money (that is not transferable to the operations side) available to actually finish that building. Maybe that constrution could help the local economy. No real decision on going forward with that construction has been made.

(7) Carlene's numbers are right as they relate to Florida's spending per child as it relates to other states. The new numbers, for 2008-2009 will put us at the bottom, 50th..... It is despicable that States like Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama spend more per pupil than Florida. And, money does make a difference. The last time I check, New Jersey spends the most per child and they had the highest average SAT scores in the country. Although, DC seems to be an exception, the more you spend, the better your results.

(8) Two years ago, Florida was dead last in the country in per pupil spending on higher education. Again, shameful.

(9) The stimulus money could help depending on how the state distributes the money throught general state budget. It is true that much of the stimulus money is tied to Title 1, IDEA and school construction. However, if the state receives other funds to flesh out the budget, the other monies could be diverted back to education. To Governor Crist's credit, his current budget proposal for 2009-2010 appears to do just that. I understand that his current budget proposal would get us back to where we were when we started the 2008-2009 school year. For some reason, the Superintendent and her staff are very pessimistic that such will actually happen and are asking us to prepare for the worst. Frankly, I am not convinced that the Feds will approve the waiver, but, hopefully they will.

Thanks guys.....

mdd88jd, thanks for the post. The situation certainly seems dire...

on #6, what is the reason for the construction decison not being made yet?

I think Governor Crist is doing his best--after all, he did veto the Legislative cut of the education money and unlike some of the other GOP govs, he is willing to take the money.

It's a shame that we Floridians have allowed the school situation to get into this condition. Our children deserve better.

:angry:

Good point Beachmouse about how Bright Futures is artificially keeping tuition levels low. At the same time, taking it away from the upper-income folks would be a double whammy: not only would their child not get the financial help that has been promised for years, but tuition is bound to rise very rapidly once fewer people start getting scholarships from the state.

Perhaps a sliding scale is in order based on income, but have everyone who meets the academic standards get something, no matter what the income level. Otherwise I'm sure we would have some good students falling through the funding cracks -- and a heck of a lot of angry parents.

Why not start making Bright Futures scholarships more targeted for certain fields? If the State of Florida is going to go after the biotech industry, then provide scholarships to those that make the grades that want to go into the biotech field if that is where the greatest need for employment lies.


As for the per student funding being so low, I would think someone needs to again come up with a targeted dollar amount that is needed to fund the system. Just saying we want more so we will not be last may not accomplish a whole lot. Number 49 may just be funding a dollar more than us and the next 40 states may be tied. At some point in time, we need to decide what sort of education system we want, how much we want to pay people, and then figure out how much money it is going to take. Then tackling the funding issue, imho, would be an easier sell to the public.

mdd88jd, thanks for the post. The situation certainly seems dire...

on #6, what is the reason for the construction decison not being made yet?

I think Governor Crist is doing his best--after all, he did veto the Legislative cut of the education money and unlike some of the other GOP govs, he is willing to take the money.

It's a shame that we Floridians have allowed the school situation to get into this condition. Our children deserve better.

:angry:

We are just waiting on the estimated construction costs from the architect to make sure we can build it without seriously affecting the capital budget. Really think it will go foward.

I agree with your assessment of Governor Crist. I think he is trying. His sister is the principal at a high school in south Florida. Maybe she has his ear.

and he was the Commissioner of Education, so he has always had a good understanding of the need for improvement.

(6) The numbers and cuts are in the operations side of the budget. Our capital budget is still fairly healthy. We are hoping, after the completion of the new Walton High School, that we can actually start construction of the new Emerald Coast High School. Constructions costs are cheaper now and we have the money (that is not transferable to the operations side) available to actually finish that building. Maybe that constrution could help the local economy. No real decision on going forward with that construction has been made.

Where might this new high school be built? I thought that the newest school would be another middle school down here south of the bay.

Mark
What would the average increase cost local Taxpayers if it was made up here? I know, people don't want to see taxes increased, but you have to ask yourself. Second, so Crist vetoed the Legistlators cuts in education but is still looking for tax cuts next year. Where do we think its going to come from?

Where might this new high school be built? I thought that the newest school would be another middle school down here south of the bay.

Sorry, that long meeting wore me out. It would be a new Emerald Coast Middle School....

Mark
What would the average increase cost local Taxpayers if it was made up here? I know, people don't want to see taxes increased, but you have to ask yourself. Second, so Crist vetoed the Legistlators cuts in education but is still looking for tax cuts next year. Where do we think its going to come from?

To answer the first question---If we could raise the millage in the capital outlay by a quarter mill, that should equal 3.5 million dollars. We would then have to get the voters to approve the transfer of that quarter mill to the operations budget similar to what we did 6 years ago with the half mill. The new total transfer would be .75 mills. However, we could not, at the same time lower the local millage on the capital side to keep the millage the "same" like we promised and did during the last referendum. In other words, we could ask for a quarter mill increase in the capital budget and ask the voters to transfer it to operations by referendum. That would be a tax increase.

Can't answer the second quesstion. But, I can tell you this. The state will require a fairly large increase in that portion fo the local millage for schools that the State controls, called the "required local effort." That you can bet on....

Thanks guys.

Good point Beachmouse about how Bright Futures is artificially keeping tuition levels low. At the same time, taking it away from the upper-income folks would be a double whammy: not only would their child not get the financial help that has been promised for years, but tuition is bound to rise very rapidly once fewer people start getting scholarships from the state.

Perhaps a sliding scale is in order based on income, but have everyone who meets the academic standards get something, no matter what the income level. Otherwise I'm sure we would have some good students falling through the funding cracks -- and a heck of a lot of angry parents.

I thought there was already financial aid available for those in need of it. It seems to me that the bright futures program is having another effect on our universities in that more "bright" people are staying in state thereby raising the bar to get into state schools. My kids are still too young but I am hearing from friends about how hard it is to get accepted to UF and FSU. This is obviously a result of the bright futures program working. I may not like it so well when mine are of age though.

I thought there was already financial aid available for those in need of it. It seems to me that the bright futures program is having another effect on our universities in that more "bright" people are staying in state thereby raising the bar to get into state schools. My kids are still too young but I am hearing from friends about how hard it is to get accepted to UF and FSU. This is obviously a result of the bright futures program working. I may not like it so well when mine are of age though.

I agree that it's great for so many families and hope that we can take advantage of it. I do know that buying into the Florida Prepaid fund when we did was a lucky break, because costs to get into the program have gone up.

I think there are a couple of levels of standards (maybe 2 or 3) for Bright Futures. Maybe the top tier could keep their full award, which is something that was offered well before the official Bright Futures program started. Perhaps that could continue to help attract the best and the brightest. Maybe the bottom and middle tier of standards could become more needs-based, with a sliding scale that includes everyone to some degree.

But my understanding is that many university presidents (the ones at the top schools especially) feel hamstrung by the artificially low tuition. With the severity of the recession, some are talking like it's crisis mode. There will be a tipping point where things are going to have to change or adjust sooner or later.

(7) Carlene's numbers are right as they relate to Florida's spending per child as it relates to other states. The new numbers, for 2008-2009 will put us at the bottom, 50th..... It is despicable that States like Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama spend more per pupil than Florida. And, money does make a difference. The last time I check, New Jersey spends the most per child and they had the highest average SAT scores in the country. Although, DC seems to be an exception, the more you spend, the better your results.

You know these are some hard figures to run down if you want to find a source that you feel is reporting equally for every state. The best I was able to do was to look at per student spending numbers released by the Census Bureau. The latest that they have is 2006. I found SAT scores for 2008, so going under the assumption, I know, that a significant increase in dollars spent, while may impact test scores, would not do so immediately I compared the two. The New Jersey/New York thing you mention was in 2002 according to several news stories I came across.

According to the census Utah ranks dead last in per student spending. I am pretty confident in this since I have heard several legislators use it as an example when debating the education budget. In 2008 they ranked 20th in SAT scores.

The number one spenders are New York, ranked 45th, New Jersey ranked 36th, and DC ranked 51st.

The ones that spend the least are Utah, ranked 20th, Idaho ranked 24th, and Arizona, ranked 30th.

Interesting that Idaho spends a thousand dollars more per student than Utah, yet still ranks lower in SAT scores.

But like you said in the past SAT scores are really what you have to look at because the test is the same throughout the country. Attached is the spreadsheet I threw together keeping track of this. The dollars came from a US Gov website.

SAT scores have some hella selection bias if you're trying to use them as a school quality proxy. I remember the last time it came up that Alabama students had higher mean SAT scores than New Jersey students, but if you drill down into the college board reports, about 5-10% of Alabama high school students take the SATs (ACT is more common for college bound students in the South and Midwest unless they're a high achiever that's looking at a top tier national schools that's still SAT-only or need a validater for a National Merit scholarship) and the percentage of students who took the SATs in New Jersey (ACT less common) was at 60-70%.

The Alabama students also had significantly higher median family income than the New Jersey students, something that suggests the Alabama group was skewing toward high achievers if you're familiar with usual student patterns.

SAT scores have some hella selection bias if you're trying to use them as a school quality proxy. I remember the last time it came up that Alabama students had higher mean SAT scores than New Jersey students, but if you drill down into the college board reports, about 5-10% of Alabama high school students take the SATs (ACT is more common for college bound students in the South and Midwest unless they're a high achiever that's looking at a top tier national schools that's still SAT-only or need a validater for a National Merit scholarship) and the percentage of students who took the SATs in New Jersey (ACT less common) was at 60-70%.

The Alabama students also had significantly higher median family income than the New Jersey students, something that suggests the Alabama group was skewing toward high achievers if you're familiar with usual student patterns.

I use them because that is what Mark always refers too.

Since median income seems to affect test scores, then why not shift more dollars into the household to raise that income level?