Funding Public Educationin

Texas

August 2012VATAT Conference

Texas Public School

FACTS

Texas Public School Statistics

• 1,021 school districts and 207 charters

• 8,526 campuses

• 4.9 million students

• 50% Hispanic; 31% White and 13% African American

• 59% Economically Disadvantaged

• 17% LEP

Texas Public School Staff

• 335,000 Teachers

• 663,000 Total Employees

Teacher Profiles

• 77% Female & 23% Male

• Beginning……..6%

• 1-5 yrs……….30%

• Over 20 yrs….17%

Shifting Demographics

• Total student population has increased by 21% over the last 10 years

• The number of Economically Disadvantaged students has increased by one million (2 million to 3 million) in the last 10 years

New Accountability Standards

• STAAR initiated in 2012

• Increased testing from 19 days to 45 days

• End of Course Exams

• Pass a total of 11 to 15 EOC Exams to graduate…dependent on graduation plan

So….With the Change in Demographics and the

Increase in Student Needs in addition to Increased

Accountability Standards one would think that

REDUCING FUNDING would not be in order….However….

What They Knewand When They Knew it:The 2006 School Tax Cut

Created A Structural Deficit

In 2006, the Fiscal Note said that for 2008-2009:

Predicted Cost of Property Tax Reduction $14.2 B(Buy down from $1.50 to $1.00)

Predicted Amount of New Revenue $ 8.3 B(Business Tax)

Predicted Shortfall $ 5.9 B

And then the gap grew: Our $10 Billion Structural Deficit

Bill $

The 82nd Legislature Cut Spending on Public Education

82nd Legislature Left Money in Rainy Day Fund

• RDF is designed to pay for ongoing expenses during an economic recession

• Contrary to the spin, the Legislature did not spend or commit the RDF—over $6.5 billion remains un-appropriated from projected $9.5 billion

• The Legislature even rejected the contingent use of the RDF – Howard Amendment would have been spent RDF

to fund enrollment growth– But only the amount above $6.4 billion already

projected to be in fund at end of 2013– And only to the extent needed to fund enrollment

growth, but not more than $2.2 billion

82nd Legislature Abandoned Historical Commitment

to Fund Schools

• Created Regular Program Allotment Adjustment Factor—change in philosophy

• Allows legislature to adjust funding by a multiplier that produces an across the board cut

• This is done through appropriations rather than through regular lawmaking

• Rep. Patrick’s Amendment eliminates this trick after they write 2014-15 budget

• Watch out for an extension

What Makes the Problem So Complicated?

Equity • Every Texas student is equally valuable

and therefore we should invest in each of them equitably

• Every Texas student should have equal educational opportunities

• Equitable funding is the only way to produce adequate funding

• Equal funding WILL NOT provide Equal Education

Same... District Tax Rate* Revenue**

LocationAlamo Heights $1.04 $6,243

San Antonio $1.04 $5,036

SizeGlen Rose $0.825 $8,424

Diboll $1.04 $4,881

Tax RateAustin $1.079 $6,171

Amarillo $1.08 $5,094

RevenueLamar Cons. $1.02 $5,475

Calallen $1.17 $5,475

Examples of Inequity

Courtesy of Equity Center

As Compared to Our Neighbors

College Station ISD TR $5,968

Willis ISD TR $5,363

Madisonville ISD TR $5,138

Conroe ISD TR $5,456

Richards ISD TR $6,695

New Waverly TR $5,003

AVG TR= $5,603 vs. HISD $5,131

Additional Revenue=$3.4Million

Local Property Taxes Alone Can’t Make up the Cut

• At maximum tax rate of $1.17, schools could only raise about $2.4 billion in new revenue state wide

• More than a fifth of the districts are already at the maximum rate of $1.17

• Some districts can’t pass an election, which is required for any increase over $1.04.

Example: To Raise More RevenueHISD Total Tax Rate $1.21

$1.04 Maintenance and Operations (M&O) .17 Debt Service

1 cent tax increase yields $180K 1% salary increase costs $400KTo Change M&O Tax Rate a Tax

Ratification Election (TRE) is RequiredIt would take a 23 cent M&O Tax rate

increase to offset $4.3 Million Reduction

What Now?Litigation and Legislation

LitigationA total of 5 lawsuits have been filed4 of the 5 have been combined into

one suitCase will be tried in Travis Count

Court by Judge Dietz…same judge as West Orange-Cove case

What Will They Argue?

• That the Cap of $1.17 M&O Tax is in essence a State Wide Property Tax

• That the level of funding is Inadequate

• That Target Revenue is Irrational

• That the current system is Inequitable

• That the current system is unfair to Taxpayers

What Now?Legislation

• Revise Current Funding System

• Health care will be “driving the bus” in the next session

• Politics will come to play since roughly 50% of the House will be freshmen or sophomores

• New Education Committee Chairs in both houses

So What Do We Do?Keep on providing a quality education for all

children;Adjust our expenditures to match our

revenue…but not without some pain in doing so;

Continue to work with our elected officials to seek common ground on funding for public schools; and

Become actively involved in the quest to find responsible solutions to a very complex problem

What Does All This Mean to My Ag Science Program?

From an Administrator’s View

• What is the view of the typical school administrator towards Ag Science and other elective programs?– Limited knowledge– Limited understanding– Consider cost first, benefit second– Numbers, numbers, numbers

From an Administrator’s View

• Requesting Budget Increases in Any Form (supplies, equipment, staff, etc)– First, know your current budget– Second, understand the budget

development process in the district– Third, know source of funds (state, federal,

local, activity, etc)– Fourth, know cost per pupil (this is where

numbers help)

From an Administrator’s View

• Budgetary Changes….must be justified– Explain reason why current budget is not

sufficient– Explain how increase will result in

improvement of the program– Explain how increase will be sufficient for a

specified period of time…avoid repeated requests for increase

From an Administrator’s View• Building Relationships with

Administrators– Involve them in all activities as possible– Keep them fully informed (even if it hurts)– Be visible on the campus – Be visible at school events– Volunteer to serve on campus and district

committees– Conduct a QUALITY program

Do’s and Don’ts

DO

• Be actively involved with elected representatives

• Be a team player on the campus and in the district

• Understand the budget process in your district

• Conduct a quality program

• Be realistic in budget requests

Don’ts

• Whine• Don’t compare your

program with other programs on campus

• Sit back and depend on others to work with elected representatives

• Expect increases in funding if numbers are declining in your program

From an Administrator’s ViewMost Common Complaints Heard

1. I only wish they would clean up that mess around their building.

2. It is a constant battle to get students to adhere to school rules and the ag teachers are no help.

3.Wish our ag teacher would be more communicative.

4. I am not sure why every purchase request is an emergency with our ag teachers.

The Bottom Line

• Don’t expect huge changes in funding from the 83rd Legislature

• Work to provide quality programming in spite of funding or lack of

• Be a LEADER, not a WHINER