The House and Senate
appropriations process is currently considering Governor Rick Snyder’s proposal
for K-12 funding and I wanted to share how it will
impact Godfrey-Lee school children.
According to the House Fiscal
Agency, our district will receive a foundation allowance increase of $111 under
the Governor’s plan. Other categoricals
such as “best practice,” “performance,” “equity (rolled into the foundation but
not increased),” and even 31A at-risk funding remain flat from the current
year. Thus, the Governor proposes a
classroom-based increase in our foundation from $7,076 to $7,187, a 1.56%
increase that is below the expected inflation rate for 2014. Just as a reminder, the Governor’s proposal
is still $287 per student below the 2009-11 levels prior to him taking office.
Our current K-12 student
enrollment is 1,916 (a 16.4% growth in enrollments over the past ten years). That
means at first glance, the Governor’s plan provides our classrooms with $212,676 in new funding assuming flat
enrollment, just 1.4% of our
projected state and local foundation and categorical funding, again falling
short of the projected rate of inflation.
However, Governor Snyder’s
proposed K-12 budget increases our MPSERs retirement costs by $56 per pupil or
a total of $108,563 removed from the “new” classroom funding. Nearly half of
the increase in the foundation allowance will be eaten up by these costs for
which the school district has no control over. In summary:
$212,676 increase
in foundation allowance ($111/pupil)
-108,563 increase in retirement costs ($56/pupil)
$104,113 net
new funding (0.67% increase)
The increased retirement
costs result from a reduction of $20,788 in the employer share (lowering of the
district cap from 20.96% to 19.76%), only to be offset by an increase of
$129,351 due to loss of 147a funds proposed by Governor Snyder. It is interesting to note that had the
Governor left the cap and 147a funding alone, the district’s cost would have
increased by "only" $87,212, thus his plan is costing our students an additional $21,351 in classroom funding.
Despite help through
previous legislation and our Board's collaborative work with employee associations to
hold down our normal rising costs, the increased health care cap this year is still expected to cost the district an additional 2.9%
along with a 10% increase in projected dental and vision plan costs, for a net increase of $62 per student or a total of $118,648. Please remember that while dental and vision plans are local issues,
the state controls the rising cap on health care costs borne by the district.
$104,113 net
new funding (before increased health care costs)
-118,648 increased costs for health, dental and
vision plans
$ (14,535) net
new money
As the
summary above concludes, the district is now looking at no additional dollars for the classroom under Governor Snyder’s
anemic proposal. Like any business or organization, we also face increases in
employee costs as our staff members deal with the rising cost of living and raising
families. This past summer, we worked collaboratively with our employee
associations to bargain lower costs after two years of deep freezes in wages
and benefits. We feel our plan is a model for both fiscal responsibility and
demonstrating appreciation for the solid work our staff is doing in a district
fraught with many learning challenges. Overall wage increases for employees
this coming year is projected at $100,737 or $53 per pupil. No decision has
been made on salary and wage increases for non-union and administrative
personnel, most of which have only had one normal increase in the past five
years.
$ (14,535) net new money (under Governor’s proposal)
(100,737) salary and wage increases
$(115,272) combined new money and personnel cost
increases
So as you can see, despite
the political rhetoric we are facing additional cuts in classroom
spending that will have further negative impacts on our students. The
Governor’s self-proclaimed “3% increase” in K-12 funding actually rolls out to a
minimum net decrease of $60 per student before
inflation is even factored into supplies, materials, technology, and fixed
costs. In addition, our district is required to sustain many of the costly
innovations that were previously funded by the federal SIG support for Lee High
School to ensure it does not return to the bottom of the state’s ranking
system. Isn't that a bit strange? It's the state's ranking system yet the federal government had to provide the needed resources.
As most districts, we
have had to utilize a significant portion of our fund balance which has fallen
from a high of 23% in 2008 to a current projection of just over 10% for this
school year. Had we not experienced an
unexpected influx of new students this past fall, it would have shrunk to 8%.
What we are asking the House and Senate to do is to support the alternative funding plan that proposes to shift funding
from a variety of categoricals into higher per pupil grants ranging from $250 to
$278. For Godfrey-Lee, a $278 increase
versus the Governor’s proposed $111 would at least provide enough flexible
funding to not only offset the increased retirement costs under his plan, but
would actually ensure approximately $204,700 in new classroom funding ($106 per pupil)
that could be used for sorely needed classroom curriculum materials, or to hire highly qualified English language
teachers in grades K-8 where students struggling with limited English
proficiency number range from 35 to 50% of each grade level. We face other
needs in the area of literacy and math proficiency as well as transitioning to
the new Common Core and science curriculums as Michigan moves forward.
