Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: A one-woman battering ram *** UPDATED x1 ***
Next Post: Get ready to rumble
Posted in:
* Before we get to the special session stuff, let’s take a look at Phil Kadner’s SouthtownStar column…
State support for public schools in Illinois dropped to an all-time low at 29.6 percent of the overall education budget in 2006, placing a greater burden on property owners to finance the schools.
That’s the first time the state has dropped below 30 percent in decades of recordkeeping. […]
The National Center for Education Statistics says Iowa funds 45.6 percent of the cost of public education, Indiana 49.1 percent, Michigan 57.3 percent and Wisconsin 44.1 percent - compared to Illinois’ paltry 29 percent.
Blagojevich has repeatedly opposed any income tax or sales tax increase to help the schools, claiming he doesn’t want to place another tax burden on working families.
But by failing to change the school funding system in Illinois, he has caused homeowners’ property tax bill to skyrocket. He has forced small-business owners in some of the poorest south suburbs to either close up shop entirely or move to Indiana.
Public schools in Illinois spent $22.3 billion overall in 2006, with $13.8 billion coming from local sources, $6.6 billion from the state and $1.86 billion from the federal government.
* I’m going to excerpt more than I should, and I’ll take it down if the SouthtownStar objects. Kadner gives us a history lesson…
In 1994, Dawn Clark Netsch, a Democrat, ran for governor, calling for an income tax hike to fund public education in Illinois and reduce property taxes.
Incumbent Gov. Jim Edgar, a Republican, denounced Netsch’s plan and said school funding reform wasn’t needed. Edgar trounced Netsch in the election. But two years later, Edgar asked the Legislature for an income tax increase to fund the public schools.
To really appreciate Edgar’s hypocrisy, you have to go back to 1992, when a constitutional amendment was on the state ballot that would have forced the state to adequately fund the schools. The weekend before the election, Edgar announced on a radio show that he would vote “no.” The measure, which needed to get 60 percent of the vote to become law, failed by two percentage points.
When members of the state board of education and the state school superintendent complained about inadequacies and inequities of the school funding system, they were all replaced - first by former state Senate President James “Pate” Philip (R-Wood Dale) and then by Blagojevich, a Democrat.
* Now, today. There’s a couple of good points about next week’s special sessions in the Tribune…
Critics immediately cast doubt on the likelihood of resolving either long-standing issue, but the moves could provide at least short term benefit for the embattled governor by playing to his strongest political supporters—organized labor and African-American voters. […]
Blagojevich’s decision to order a snap, one-day special session on education funding raised questions about his expectations on an issue that has been debated and studied countless times over the decades with little change.
* The Sun-Times also makes some very good points about Tuesday’s education special session, which the official proclamation states will be about “increasing school funding, improving the school funding structure and eliminating any current inequities”…
The effort to focus on a decades-old malady in one day followed a demand earlier Tuesday for a schools-related special session by key African-American lawmakers, including Sen. James Meeks (D-Chicago). He is leading a call for Chicago schoolchildren to boycott the first day of classes to protest school-funding disparities. [Emphasis added]
* Besides the Madigan-bashing politics and the capital bill (which I’ll discuss in another post), that threatened boycott by Meeks and other ministers is partly behind this special session call. A bit of recent history…
Reverend Ira Acree is the second Chicago preacher to call for the first-day-of-school boycott… Acree says the more participants, the more attention the school funding issue will get, which could only benefit Chicago’s cash-strapped schools in the long run.
[…]Acree says he is trying to get 25 additional city pastors to get on board with this protest. So far, another seven have agreed. Acree added there will be a protest on Thursday at noon in downtown Chicago about the funding issue. And after the first day boycott, ministers say they plan to hold classes in the lobbies of downtown buildings to get the business community to pay attention.
* And this is from the governor’s spokesman in today’s SJ-R…
“This is really for them,” Guerrero said of [African-American] lawmakers who pushed for the education focus. “We think it is a good idea.”
* But Meeks has been burned before…
Little more than two years ago, Blagojevich dissuaded Meeks from making a third-party run for governor by offering to lease the state lottery to pump money into schools—a proposal that went nowhere. In May, Meeks voted for Blagojevich’s larger public works proposal, which, like the governor’s current plan, counts on money from a lottery lease. Meeks said he won’t vote for a lottery lease again.
* More on the specific policy proposals from Rev. Sen. Meeks…
State Sen. James Meeks said Springfield needs to “strike down the way we currently fund schools and start all over again.” Meeks has called for a boycott of Chicago Public Schools on the first day of classes, saying parents whose kids go to under-funded schools should instead use the day to try to enroll their children at public schools that have more money. […]
It’s unlikely there will be an agreement on whether parents should be allowed to pick any school for their children, NBC5’s Mary Ann Ahern reported.
“Unlikely” is an understatement, to say the least. The idea about dumping the property tax for education funding is more interesting, but it’s probably not going anywhere, either.
We’ll get more into the politics of this special later this morning. Thoughts on all this?
* Related…
* Dan Proft: Rethinking Meeks
* Black Caucus Gets Special Session on School Funding
* State task force holds hearings on keeping pregnant and parenting moms from dropping out
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 9:26 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: A one-woman battering ram *** UPDATED x1 ***
Next Post: Get ready to rumble
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Of course, IL ranks 17th on what it spends per pupil. MAYBE we should look as ADMIN costs across the districts?
From the Census Br.
First number is total spending on instruction, second is Admin.
IL 5225 766
MI 5319 759
WI 5968 758
IN 5267 667
Notice a trend? Maybe he should go to Pershing Ave?
Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 9:45 am
PC, the schools here spend literally a few dollars more on admin than Michigan and Wisconsin and this is somehow a stunning revelation that must be addressed?
You’re stretching.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 9:48 am
Two quick points. First, the education system currently relies in part on revenue generated from the lottery. The lottery has been steadily increaings is contribution to education. it was roughly 550 Mill under Ryan and is upto roughly 650 Mill now and continues to show sings of growth.
Leasing the lottery today has its greates financial impact on education by selling off futre revenue gains for education in the future. Thus leasing the lottery to fund education is selling off education funding in the future for pennies on the dollar today. As a funding soruce the lottery lease does the most damage to education. What happens in 15 years when education would be getting 1 bill from the lottery, but is locked into the 600 mill rate. How about in 40 years when the lottery will be genertaing 2 bill in revenue for education, but the state annutiy payment is still at 600 mill. Education will get a small chunk of money today but over the term of the lease will lose billions in funding each year in the future. A lottery lease does not help education or its problems, it imperils the future of education in Illinois.
Second point, we need to put in place a uniform funding system for education. Either set a state property tax rate, having every person and business pay the same percenatge of property vlaue into a single fund divided equally amongst schools; or eliminate property tax funding of education all together. The Capital plan is not the way to fix education
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 9:56 am
Still PC’s numbers reveal a disparity of priorities. Among the four, Illinois spends the least per pupil but pays the most per pupil in admin costs. While not the only education spending issue, the ratio certainly is indicative of questionable spending priorities.
Comment by Captain Flume Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:01 am
Stretching? Illinois admin costs are a larger piece relative, but not as much as I would have thought, given that we have more than twice as many individual school districts…
Comment by countryboy Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:02 am
How is it that state education funding has gone up by $800 million in five years and yet our education finances are allegedly in such bad shape? Because Kadner doesn’t understand statistics. If high spending suburban schools raise their funding then it blows the curve. By worrying about the pct of state funding we’re basically saying the state has to raise it’s funding everytime some rich school district wants a new swimming pool. It is absolutely absurd.
The districts that are heavily reliant on local property taxes are the wealthier districts who can afford it. State funding already goes primarily to districts who need it. If you want to raise funding fine, but do it for the right reasons and demand results.
Ahh. But no one wants to talk about results and reforms, only money, and that my friend is how the inner cities get left behind.
For more on the issue check out: Education and Equity
Comment by mike van winkle Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:03 am
Everyone seems to be overlooking Rev. Meeks’ self-described exclusive in his interview on local FOX TV Sunday morning where he said that he was lied to by Rod about education funding in order to get him to drop out of the gubernatorial race in 2006 and that he was announcing that he would definately run in the 2010 Dem primary for Governor to get back at Rod for his failure to fulfill his commitment to fund an extra $2B for education. If Meeks runs, Rod’s last base of support within the African-American community becomes significantly diminished. That’s why within three days of Meeks’ “exclusive”, the special session on education funding was announced by Rod.
Comment by A 9th CD Democrat Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:07 am
MI has 552 districts, 4090 schools. 83 counties
IL has 888 districts, 4401 schools. 101 counties.
The point is that it is NOT total spending - it is how you spend and what you spend on. Pouring more money without reform won’t improve things.
The effect of more money on the Senator’s political base is something else.
And, frankly, since we can’t seem to find money to fix roads, where will new money for schools come from?
Comment by Pat Collins Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:14 am
Perhaps someone knows of where a summary answer to this question is.
I’m somewhat amazed at how education funding has decreased here in Illinois. We’ve decreased school funding, the Guv has been stealing from transportation funding, and we are not exactly at the low end of taxes compared to other states.
Where is all the money going? Considering that the state budget is hundreds of pages long, I’m not exactly excited about doing the research myself, but maybe I have to.
Comment by trafficmatt Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:15 am
The 20-year requirement to have a question on whether to call a constitutional convention exists so the people can act when the legislature is unable or unwilling to act.
How many decades need to go by until we realize the legislature isn’t going to fix this problem and only a constitutional convention could? There’s an education article in the state constitution, it’s a constitutional issue, its time to finally tackle this problem.
Comment by John Bambenek Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:20 am
Let’s look at revenue. I’ll compare MI to IL since they both have a large city, similar population, and large area.
total: MI 10486
IL 10101
close.
SOURCE of Rev.
Fed. MI 868
IL 883
A little better for IL.
State MI 6307
IL 3442
Local MI 3311
IL 5775
OK, this shows what we saw before - the difference is if the money gets filtered through the state capital or not.
The difference is this - if it is raised locally, we KNOW it’s going to education. If it comes from the state, how do we know it won’t go the way of the state lottery?
That is, to replace money that gets spent elsewhere?
Comment by Pat Collins Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:21 am
So, first you complain about the locals spending too much on admin, and now you say it’s a good thing that the locals are raising money for their schools?
Pick a lane.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:23 am
Will Meeks’s proposal include the “cash strpped” school districts in Oblong, Paris, Pittsfield, Centralia, and many other smaller areas or is Chicago the only focus? Funding changes are going to force mergers, consolitation, and partnerships throughout education and probably many other programs that get substantial state dollars. The chance of a good solution in 1-2 days of mandated special session is very low. If taxes are not raised, how many ways can you sift around the same sand pile and think you are actually covering the rising bubble of costs? You either shovel to fewer places to shovel to or you get more sand. Meeks wants more sand for one location. Where will it come from or who loses what they have? Gambking and Lottery leases do not look promising in the long run.
Comment by zatoichi Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:25 am
Sadly, a boycott of any day of education is lost revenue for schools. They count every single day for the Average Daily Attendance! It will take state dollars away from the children who need it the most. The disparity that he discusses is all property taxation. Where New Trier receives 1.25% of its revenue from the state and Harvey receives 65.5% of its revenue from the state. Calumet receives 54.5% from the state. Each day away brings the average daily attendence down and starts the kids on the wrong tract. By trying to enroll youngsters in districts that they do not live in they have the right of refusal unless they are declared homeless. The best way to get this done is to convince others. And among democrats you can’t get this done either. Its pathetic after all this time that a balanced approach to fixing a structural income/expenditure problem cannot be compromised.
Comment by Gameplan Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:26 am
Aside from the schools, I see this as just another gambit by What’s-His-Name. (A) A big splashy press release complete with slogan, and (B) a finger in the eye of the legistlature, calling them to Springfield in the middle of their summer vacation and right in the middle of the State Fair. Where exactly are they going to find hotel rooms for all these people? And the Gov himself? Well, he’ll just fly back home to his own comfy bed.
Comment by What planet is he from again? Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:30 am
In order to know what to do, we should know what not to do. I am showing that total spending for the two is about the same.
Actually, my real radical reform for Sen. Meeks is this.
Split the Chicago school district into 5 or 6 smaller ones. Have O’Hare and the downtown area be “central revenue streams” that supply to those areas based on enrollment. Let those areas raise/lower taxes on their own.
That doesn’t help Harvey and E. St. Louis, but it’s a start.
Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:33 am
Rich-
Sure, maybe the locals do spend too much of the pie that should be going to the students. But this is Illinois, surely you understand that filtering the money through Springfield will add another horse to feed at the trough? It *does* have the potential of creating a worse problem. The question is how do we solve it.
Comment by John Bambenek Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:33 am
===Split the Chicago school district into 5 or 6 smaller ones.===
OK, so after arguing that we spend too much on admin and have too many districts, you now want to create several more big districts?
Please, stop now.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:36 am
Our elected leaders know what to do, but lack the political will to do it. It’s difficult to imagine that any progress in education funding reform can be made in the context of the current poisoned political atmosphere in Springfield.
Comment by Captain America Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:37 am
Readers should go back to “Mike Van Winkle’s” post before commenting. The overall percent of state funding is a bogus issue here. As local funding is increased by rich districts, state share goes down across the state.
Comment by Mr. Wizard Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:42 am
Though a good topic for discussion, education reform is not really the reason for the sessions next week. Public relations is, as I think Rich or someone pointed out somewhere.
There may be education reform if legislators were paid, not at a statewide rate, at the same rate the school districts within their legislative and representative districts were funded.
Comment by Captain Flume Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:48 am
Exactly… what goes on in Springfield is political manuevering, not legislation… if you care about education funding reform the ONLY possible avenue where that could be meaningfully addressed is in a constitutional convention. Otherwise, we’re just waiting for the ILGA to grow up and address it… we’ve only been waiting 40 years now… only 2 more generations of students fed through systems that don’t work.
Comment by John Bambenek Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 10:59 am
Funding for education will always be a problem, regardless of how much is spent and where it is spent.
In many school districts the problem is not the level of funding. The problem is lack of parental participation. It is up to the parents to be sure their children attend school, stay home at night and study, etc.
Just compare what the catholic and other denominational schools spend on a per pupil basis. Then compare these private schools results with the public schools.
Most, if not all public schools, spend substantially more than the private schools. The big difference between public and private schools is parental participation!
Increasesin funding alone is not the answer.
Comment by MOON Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 11:01 am
Out here in Oak Park we already are property taxed to the gills, despite a moderate income base, so anything that the good Rev can do to change that is fine by me. I don’t think that a good education should be available only to the children of wealthy elites.
But the devil really is in the details. Where is the redistributed money going to come from and who is going to see increases in their overall tax burden. Will Meeks’ plan necessarily result in lower overall taxes for residents of moderate income communities like mine, even with a tax swap. Or will we be paying more while, say, Winnetka residents are unaffected. Meeks’ constituents include a lot of middle class people just like me. They should be checking the details, disconcerting as those may be, because my guess is that if there is more money to be paid out, the middle class, not the wealthy, will have to pay it.
Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 11:01 am
Let’s say that during the special session Blago called to address school funding the House AND Senate suddenly decide to increase the state income tax to 5% and devote all the funding to eduction. Will Blago then veto the tax increase? Sounds like he could find himself in a corner if MJM calls his bluff.
Comment by Bluefish Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 11:05 am
More funding adds another coat of paint over the rust of the true structure that makes education work. Please see the article on discussing an Efficient Solution to Public Education in the blog
http://www.truthfuljames.blogspot.com.
that deals with the legs of the seat of knowledge.
True school choice — including not only public schools but also its subset charter schools as well as parochial, private and even home schooling would be self motivating for the parents and is appropriate.
The child learns by example both in the classroom and in the home.
What has happened to date is the CPS and other systems have passed non performing students through the systems and ejected them into a world for which they were unqualified. We are now on the third generation and have created many parents who are not capable of delivering children ready to enter the learning process, can not reinforce what has been taught in the classroom, and at worst no longer believe that education is an economic or a social good.
In CPS we have the sight of the least qualified teachers by default and because of the union preference system sent to the lowest performing schools in the toughest neighborhoods.
More money is not going to solve the problem, ramping up teacher pay grades does not make better teachers. Lowering class sizes only means that the new rooms will be manned by even less qualified new hires.
Let’s reinvest the parents with a direct stake in the child’s success. Vouchers good across all available and qualified schools in the only program which has proven successful — and at lower cost. Let CPS and East Saint Louis and the rest compete. To the extent that the voucher is below the current cost of a CPS education (?) then let them reinvest in increasing the quality of their own system.
Chicago, Illinois, and the nation deserve the best qualified graduates to enable the city, the state and America to compete in the 21st Century world economy.
Let us create graduates able from their education and reinforced by the family to work towards and not just dream about interclass mobility - - a future in which the present job is only the beginninbg and welfare and public housing only a temporary respite.
The children deserve no less.
Comment by Truthful James Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 12:25 pm
The problem with Meeks is that he actually believes what people like the Governor tell him and threatening to run in 2 years is a pretty limp threat. Blago doesn’t have a clue what he’ll be doing in 2 years, so Meeks might want to re-think his plans.
What they should do is boycott the schools and start marching around City Hall one day and the State of Illinois the next until they get what they want. Keep the kids out till they get fixed. That would open some eyes.
And the idea of protesting at good school districts is ludicrous and would be counter productive.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 1:26 pm
No matter how much money you throw at education reform an underachieving child in a single parent household where education isnt a priority just isnt going to live up to their potential.
Comment by fed up Wednesday, Aug 6, 08 @ 7:11 pm
If a child comes from a disfunctional home, he should not be penalized.He still deserves access to aquality education.All students in our great state deserve and are entitled to attend a school that provides functional building,extra curricular activities,top notch teachers,a computer technological center, current books as well as enough books to accomadate each student.We are one of the wealthiest states in our nation, it is a disgace that we lead the nation in school funding disparity. There is no excuse for children who need the most help receiving the least amount of resources.
Comment by Emil IV Thursday, Aug 21, 08 @ 9:37 pm