Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - ICPR responds *** A bit more on that curious Tribune passage
Next Post: Two political views of SB 1
Posted in:
* Thankfully, Illinois has reporters like Dusty Rhodes, who laid out what’s really at stake with SB 1…
[Gov. Rauner] has been traveling the state, saying will use his amendatory veto to send more money to downstate schools. But a third of the dollars he plans to give downstate districts come straight out of Chicago Public Schools’ block grant, which he plans to cut by at least $200 million. That’s not a point he’s been emphasizing in his appearances, and when I asked him about it, he seemed fuzzy on the facts.
“Chicago has received a special block grant that no other school district gets,” he said. “Auburn doesn’t get any of that money. Springfield, Decatur doesn’t get any of that money. And that was put in place more than 20 years ago because Chicago pays its own pensions. So we, all of us in Illinois, taxpayers, have been funding Chicago extra money — $250 million per year, in large part because Chicago pays its own teacher pension.”
In reality, the CPS block grant has no formal relationship to pensions. All districts receive state reimbursement for seven “categoricals” above what they receive in General State Aid. Every district except Chicago has to submit vouchers to get reimbursed for these categoricals. But since 1995, Chicago has been reimbursed via a block grant, based, at least in part, on the reality that submitting claims for thousands of different students was burdensome. Over the years, as CPS enrollment has declined, the block grant resulted in the district receiving $250 million more than it would if it had to submit vouchers for reimbursement.
Rauner’s education czar Beth Purvis has said those extra funds have been audited, and aren’t being misspent. “There’s no implication that CPS is misusing those funds in any way, shape or form,” she told me in May. “We believe that they’re using them for the educational costs of educating those children.”
Nevertheless, all Republican plans would eliminate CPS block grant overages for at least three of those seven categoricals, resulting in a loss of $202 million, which would then be redistributed to other districts. That’s one reason Rauner’s online spreadsheet shows much more generous payouts to downstate schools.
There’s more, so go read the rest before commenting, please. Thanks.
* Related..
* Hinz: Who’s telling the truth about state school funding—Rauner or Dems?
* Crain’s editorial: SB1 is flawed, but it’s a necessary step for Illinois schools
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 9:33 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - ICPR responds *** A bit more on that curious Tribune passage
Next Post: Two political views of SB 1
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Greg Hinz agrees that Chicago would get just 16 percent of the funding while educating 19 percent of the students. Some bailout!
Comment by anon2 Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 9:59 am
As a Chicagoan, the concern I have is that all districts will receive more money under Rauner’s proposal, at the expense of Chicago’s children.
But there’s a lot more suburban+downstate voters than Chicago voters.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 10:46 am
“The budgetary leeway that lawmakers gave CPS in 1995 was supposed to last only four years — long enough to finance repairs to dilapidated schools and shore up educational programs. Instead, that financial flexibility remained in place for 20 years, becoming a staple of CPS’ budget strategy.”
Sounds like it’s their problem.
Comment by ste_with_a_v_en Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 10:51 am
So Rauner & Co. think the CPS grant money is being spent well! Even more reason not to take it away from our most needy and vulnerable!
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 10:57 am
Meh, Rauner’s engaging in old-timey Chicago-baiting (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), formerly the exclusive province of back-bench mushrooms, not governors.
So original.
Did he pay a lot for that “messaging” strategery?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jul 24, 17 @ 11:51 am