NYT Article on Fiscal Cliff Faced by School Districts Nationwide

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

The problem is that school expenses are inelastic. There are a lot of fixed, or nearly fixed, costs tied up in staffing and facilities. As we saw this year, it is very controversial to cut teachers even when enrollment decreases. Closing schools would be even more controversial. So kids going private decreases revenue without really decreasing costs.

People don’t understand how many kids need to leave in order to reduce expenses for a school district. For example, let’s say the school district loss 100 students this year. While that seems like a lot it’s really not because those 100 students likely represent a wide range of schools and grades.

As PP indicates vouchers would be a loss of funds for a school district while their expenses remained the same.

Exactly. This is also why cutting MVA provided cost savings even though it was theoretically cheaper on a per-pupil basis than in-person.

Except some of those kids need specialized programs or privates and 1-1 para's so you are just hiding and shifting the money around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We know MCPS wastes boatloads of $$$ on pointless programs. There is so much fat in their budget that they need to cut. I'd personally rather they stopped with all the discretionary spending on comms firms, RJ or SEL programs or maybe don't hire 30 more staff for dubious DEI initiatives that push honors for all to dumb everything down.

Yes to all of this. MCPS wastes too much money on useless initiatives that don’t even help students.

Cut the nonsense. Focus on smaller class sizes and a strong curriculum.

Addressing class sizes is the most expensive thing MCPs can do. I don't think people realize just how much of the budget goes to teachers and facilities rather than the programs that are often criticized here.

+1 I actually think smaller class sizes would be great, but these "why don't they just....." folks have not done the math. Most schools are at or above capacity right now, even with portables. Reducing class sizes in a meaningful way would require tens of millions of dollars in new construction, and then staffing those new buildings would be a permanent investment. We may want to make that investment as a county, but it's not an easy answer by any stretch of the imagination.

Its a bit of a sham to say we are increasing class sizes by 1-2 per class when if you had extra kids you'd just put them in those classes anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

The problem is that school expenses are inelastic. There are a lot of fixed, or nearly fixed, costs tied up in staffing and facilities. As we saw this year, it is very controversial to cut teachers even when enrollment decreases. Closing schools would be even more controversial. So kids going private decreases revenue without really decreasing costs.

People don’t understand how many kids need to leave in order to reduce expenses for a school district. For example, let’s say the school district loss 100 students this year. While that seems like a lot it’s really not because those 100 students likely represent a wide range of schools and grades.

As PP indicates vouchers would be a loss of funds for a school district while their expenses remained the same.

Exactly. This is also why cutting MVA provided cost savings even though it was theoretically cheaper on a per-pupil basis than in-person.

Except some of those kids need specialized programs or privates and 1-1 para's so you are just hiding and shifting the money around.

It doesn't work that way in practice. There are only so many private special education programs. Closing MVA might slightly shift who gets into those programs, but it isn't going to change how many in total are going to those programs. The same for paras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

If public schools can't afford to pay teachers because too many students are moving to private schools, then they're going to have to start caring. You can't "sanction" your way out of bad incentives. The incentives currently push in favor of teachers and administrators, not students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cut administration, both school-based and central office. Place employees with teaching degrees back into the classroom.

There are far too many positions that have little to no impact on the classroom.

Stop making sense!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

But fewer kids means that fewer resources are dedicated to certain schools - i.e., a class of a certain number means you have one class vs. two, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

If public schools can't afford to pay teachers because too many students are moving to private schools, then they're going to have to start caring. You can't "sanction" your way out of bad incentives. The incentives currently push in favor of teachers and administrators, not students.

No they don’t because the people impacted will be the tax payers, who agreed to the voucher system. The public school system will be able to tell everyone good luck with their private schools search and admissions. You’re trying to punish(sorry incentivize) the part of the system that already has the most burden and responsibility at a time when the folks in that system are telling everyone they’ve had enough.

Folks ask are privates that accept vouchers going to be mandated to the same standards of accountability measure and reporting as public’s currently and no one wants to say Yes because they know most privates won’t accept vouchers then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

If public schools can't afford to pay teachers because too many students are moving to private schools, then they're going to have to start caring. You can't "sanction" your way out of bad incentives. The incentives currently push in favor of teachers and administrators, not students.

No they don’t because the people impacted will be the tax payers, who agreed to the voucher system. The public school system will be able to tell everyone good luck with their private schools search and admissions. You’re trying to punish(sorry incentivize) the part of the system that already has the most burden and responsibility at a time when the folks in that system are telling everyone they’ve had enough.

Folks ask are privates that accept vouchers going to be mandated to the same standards of accountability measure and reporting as public’s currently and no one wants to say Yes because they know most privates won’t accept vouchers then.

Also heavily impacted would be the school teachers and administrators that would start being let go if/when enrollment drops. Vouchers would force those groups into prioritizing student needs instead if just their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

If public schools can't afford to pay teachers because too many students are moving to private schools, then they're going to have to start caring. You can't "sanction" your way out of bad incentives. The incentives currently push in favor of teachers and administrators, not students.

No they don’t because the people impacted will be the tax payers, who agreed to the voucher system. The public school system will be able to tell everyone good luck with their private schools search and admissions. You’re trying to punish(sorry incentivize) the part of the system that already has the most burden and responsibility at a time when the folks in that system are telling everyone they’ve had enough.

Folks ask are privates that accept vouchers going to be mandated to the same standards of accountability measure and reporting as public’s currently and no one wants to say Yes because they know most privates won’t accept vouchers then.

Also heavily impacted would be the school teachers and administrators that would start being let go if/when enrollment drops. Vouchers would force those groups into prioritizing student needs instead if just their own.

You seem to be under some misguided belief that private schools prioritize student need more than public school. I can assure you they don’t. They just have less student needs to worry about. Also, if at any point a student’s needs exceed what they currently provide or want to provide, said student will be counseled out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing surprising there. Many school districts used a temporary revenue stream to fund permanent/ongoing services/staff, rather than funding short-term, pandemic-related expenses as intended.

Adding to that, telling working families that it is unreasonable to expect public schools to stay open caused some to permanently switch to private school.

But that should actually make things easier for places like MCPS. Those parents still pay the same property taxes but it's a few less kids for the school to spend $ on. We don't have vouchers etc here.

We probably should have vouchers, though. MCPS needs to feel consequences from putting MCEA requests above student needs. If doing that would lead to more students going private, and thus MCPs losing funding, then the BoE would have to think twice about that.

Vouchers to where? There are not enough private schools and privates are far more than what one would get in a voucher so it really only helps those already in private or those who can afford it regardless of the voucher.

The point isn't to try to accommodate every child in private school. It would be to create a system of incentives where school districts would need to prioritize student needs in order to hang on to their per-pupil funding. Right now public schools have a captive market. They don't need to put students first because those students, and their associated funding,
are stuck there. Vouchers could change that dynamic.

That's not an incentive for public. They will not care. If a family wants private, they will do it. There aren't enough privates. Instead, they should be sanctioned financially for their failures. And, have 100% accountability and full public audit of every dollar spent.

If public schools can't afford to pay teachers because too many students are moving to private schools, then they're going to have to start caring. You can't "sanction" your way out of bad incentives. The incentives currently push in favor of teachers and administrators, not students.

No they don’t because the people impacted will be the tax payers, who agreed to the voucher system. The public school system will be able to tell everyone good luck with their private schools search and admissions. You’re trying to punish(sorry incentivize) the part of the system that already has the most burden and responsibility at a time when the folks in that system are telling everyone they’ve had enough.

Folks ask are privates that accept vouchers going to be mandated to the same standards of accountability measure and reporting as public’s currently and no one wants to say Yes because they know most privates won’t accept vouchers then.

Also heavily impacted would be the school teachers and administrators that would start being let go if/when enrollment drops. Vouchers would force those groups into prioritizing student needs instead if just their own.

You seem to be under some misguided belief that private schools prioritize student need more than public school. I can assure you they don’t. They just have less student needs to worry about. Also, if at any point a student’s needs exceed what they currently provide or want to provide, said student will be counseled out.

No, that's not the assumption. The point is *not* to drive students to private schools. That isn't practical. The point is to force *public* schools to prioritize students. If putting student needs on the back-burner would cause public schools to lose funding, and ultimately lead to layoffs, then school boards and administrators would need to reprioritize.

[Anonymous]

https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/no-accountability-vouchers-wreak-havoc-states

[Anonymous]

Highest cost are usually in salaries, transportation, food services, and in high school, athletics.
It should be reasonable to cut some of those programs and positions..