| SEARCH OnWEAC |
|---|
 |
| 163KB PDF |
Using the Fund Balance and Raising Student Fees
In 2002-2003, 69% of districts used their fund balance to support their budget, while 75% increased student fees. Districts have the option of passing a referendum in order to exceed the revenue caps. However, in an earlier study most superintendents indicated that use of a referendum for this purpose was too time-consuming and burdensome and felt it should not be required to meet reasonable and necessary operating expenses.
This reluctance to go to referendum may explain in part why more and more districts report using their fund balance and raising student fees in order to minimize the negative effects of revenue controls. In 1999-2000, 53% of districts used their fund balance. This figure increased to 57% in 2000-2001, and 64% in 2001-2002. It’s noteworthy that 72% of respondents in the current study say that result of this action has been harmful.
As for student fees, 75% of districts increased them in 2002-2003. This compares with 56% in 1999-2000, 59% in 2000-2001, and 64% in 2001-2002. Fee increases create hardships for some families and also may limit students’ participation in activities. For these reasons it is not surprising that two-thirds of superintendents say that increasing student fees is harmful.
Hiring and Retaining Staff
Superintendents were asked about the effects of the revenue caps on their capacity to hire and retain quality administrators, support staff, teachers, and guidance counselors/social workers/psychologists. Across all employee groups an average of 38% of superintendents said the impact was “Negative,” or “Very Negative.” Of the four groups listed, superintendents said that the caps had the most negative impact on teacher hiring and retention.
Table 3: Effects of the Revenue Caps on the District's Capacity to Hire and Retain Quality Administrators, Education Support Staff, Teachers, and Guidance Counselors/Social Workers/Psychologists
| Negative |
No difference |
Positive |
|
| Hiring administrators | 37% |
62% |
1% |
| Hiring education support staff | 30% |
70% |
1% |
| Hiring teachers | 51% |
48% |
1% |
| Hiring guidance counselors/social workers/ psychologists | 35% |
64% |
1% |
| Retaining administrators | 38% |
61% |
1% |
| Retaining education support staff | 32% |
67% |
2% |
| Retaining teachers | 46% |
52% |
2% |
| Retaining guidance counselors/social workers/ pyschologists | 33% |
65% |
2% |
This past year districts took steps that may discourage people from pursuing careers in public education. Besides reducing the number of courses, offering fewer staff development opportunities, and spending less on curricular materials and consumables, districts took actions that adversely affect the working conditions of school employees. These include the following:
Comments about School Finance and Related Issues
A final question allowed superintendents the opportunity to make recommendations to the Governor’s Task Force on Educational Excellence that are related to attracting and retaining quality staff, supporting special education, investing in early education, providing the appropriate level of funding and the right mix of funding sources, and ensuring equal opportunity for all children.
Nearly every one of the 344 superintendents participating in this study offered at least one idea. Most comments related to repealing or changing the existing revenue control law/current system of funding public education. Many wrote specifically that we must find an alternative to the local property tax and often suggested a sales tax as the most attractive option.
There also were numerous comments along the following type: state government must either eliminate or pay for "unfunded mandates;" the state and federal governments need to pay for more of the costs of educating children with special needs; local districts must have more control; we need to address the funding disparities among districts; and the state must create a basic level of funding for each child. There were several who said that the task force itself needed to include additional persons, especially legislators and school business managers/experts on school finance.
Finally, there were scattered comments addressing topics such as rising health care costs, the 2001 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, differences between rural and urban school districts, and accountability for public schools.