Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight, Dr. Taylor will release his 2027 operating budget recommendations:

This is going to drive the rest of the conversation for the school system between now and the June, so you'll want to tune in, pay attention and take lots of notes.

I predict gimmicky props and cringey dad jokes from Taylor. But given the budget shortfalls at the state and county levels, I also expect some pretty sobering statements and decisions as well as we simply don't have the money to fix all that is broken with MCPS. At least not all at once and in the face of declining enrollments and stagnant growth in the county.

Let's be clear: we- the county and state- do have the money if we would prioritize and fund schools appropriately, as has been done in the past. There just isn't public support or political will to do the necessary tax increases or other-spending decreases to do so.

We have a $1.5 billion shortfall at the state level. What kind of pocket change can be found in the couch cushions to close that kind of gap?

At the county level: We JUST raised taxes in 2023 https://dcist.com/story/23/05/25/md-montgomery-county-council-property-taxes-hike/

You think there's more appetite or willingness to raise property taxes AGAIN in the face of our county being decimated by DOGE and all of the chaos at the White House?

And even if we could muster that political will up, WHY should anyone feel good about pouring more money into MCPS with all of its systemic failures and incompetence?

MCPS has been a problem that seemingly no amount of money can fix.

Couldn’t agree more. Let’s get a proper audit of all the programs and central office staff. Program after program yet no true idea of they are actually working except students barely meeting standards. How many central staffers that make $200k contribute something tangible. The debacle of the boundaries is ongoing. This system feels rudderless with everyone just going off on their pet project.

Now they want more money??

So you want a pay freeze and reduction in benefits for teachers?

Most people don’t get regular raises. They make good money for 10 month jobs. Central office staff salaries should be cut or jobs eliminated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight, Dr. Taylor will release his 2027 operating budget recommendations:

This is going to drive the rest of the conversation for the school system between now and the June, so you'll want to tune in, pay attention and take lots of notes.

I predict gimmicky props and cringey dad jokes from Taylor. But given the budget shortfalls at the state and county levels, I also expect some pretty sobering statements and decisions as well as we simply don't have the money to fix all that is broken with MCPS. At least not all at once and in the face of declining enrollments and stagnant growth in the county.

Let's be clear: we- the county and state- do have the money if we would prioritize and fund schools appropriately, as has been done in the past. There just isn't public support or political will to do the necessary tax increases or other-spending decreases to do so.

We have a $1.5 billion shortfall at the state level. What kind of pocket change can be found in the couch cushions to close that kind of gap?

At the county level: We JUST raised taxes in 2023 https://dcist.com/story/23/05/25/md-montgomery-county-council-property-taxes-hike/

You think there's more appetite or willingness to raise property taxes AGAIN in the face of our county being decimated by DOGE and all of the chaos at the White House?

And even if we could muster that political will up, WHY should anyone feel good about pouring more money into MCPS with all of its systemic failures and incompetence?

MCPS has been a problem that seemingly no amount of money can fix.

Couldn’t agree more. Let’s get a proper audit of all the programs and central office staff. Program after program yet no true idea of they are actually working except students barely meeting standards. How many central staffers that make $200k contribute something tangible. The debacle of the boundaries is ongoing. This system feels rudderless with everyone just going off on their pet project.

Now they want more money??

So you want a pay freeze and reduction in benefits for teachers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight, Dr. Taylor will release his 2027 operating budget recommendations:

This is going to drive the rest of the conversation for the school system between now and the June, so you'll want to tune in, pay attention and take lots of notes.

I predict gimmicky props and cringey dad jokes from Taylor. But given the budget shortfalls at the state and county levels, I also expect some pretty sobering statements and decisions as well as we simply don't have the money to fix all that is broken with MCPS. At least not all at once and in the face of declining enrollments and stagnant growth in the county.

Let's be clear: we- the county and state- do have the money if we would prioritize and fund schools appropriately, as has been done in the past. There just isn't public support or political will to do the necessary tax increases or other-spending decreases to do so.

We have a $1.5 billion shortfall at the state level. What kind of pocket change can be found in the couch cushions to close that kind of gap?

At the county level: We JUST raised taxes in 2023 https://dcist.com/story/23/05/25/md-montgomery-county-council-property-taxes-hike/

You think there's more appetite or willingness to raise property taxes AGAIN in the face of our county being decimated by DOGE and all of the chaos at the White House?

And even if we could muster that political will up, WHY should anyone feel good about pouring more money into MCPS with all of its systemic failures and incompetence?

MCPS has been a problem that seemingly no amount of money can fix.

Couldn’t agree more. Let’s get a proper audit of all the programs and central office staff. Program after program yet no true idea of they are actually working except students barely meeting standards. How many central staffers that make $200k contribute something tangible. The debacle of the boundaries is ongoing. This system feels rudderless with everyone just going off on their pet project.

Now they want more money??

So you want a pay freeze and reduction in benefits for teachers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight, Dr. Taylor will release his 2027 operating budget recommendations:

This is going to drive the rest of the conversation for the school system between now and the June, so you'll want to tune in, pay attention and take lots of notes.

I predict gimmicky props and cringey dad jokes from Taylor. But given the budget shortfalls at the state and county levels, I also expect some pretty sobering statements and decisions as well as we simply don't have the money to fix all that is broken with MCPS. At least not all at once and in the face of declining enrollments and stagnant growth in the county.

Let's be clear: we- the county and state- do have the money if we would prioritize and fund schools appropriately, as has been done in the past. There just isn't public support or political will to do the necessary tax increases or other-spending decreases to do so.

We have a $1.5 billion shortfall at the state level. What kind of pocket change can be found in the couch cushions to close that kind of gap?

At the county level: We JUST raised taxes in 2023 https://dcist.com/story/23/05/25/md-montgomery-county-council-property-taxes-hike/

You think there's more appetite or willingness to raise property taxes AGAIN in the face of our county being decimated by DOGE and all of the chaos at the White House?

And even if we could muster that political will up, WHY should anyone feel good about pouring more money into MCPS with all of its systemic failures and incompetence?

MCPS has been a problem that seemingly no amount of money can fix.

Couldn’t agree more. Let’s get a proper audit of all the programs and central office staff. Program after program yet no true idea of they are actually working except students barely meeting standards. How many central staffers that make $200k contribute something tangible. The debacle of the boundaries is ongoing. This system feels rudderless with everyone just going off on their pet project.

Now they want more money??

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tonight, Dr. Taylor will release his 2027 operating budget recommendations:

This is going to drive the rest of the conversation for the school system between now and the June, so you'll want to tune in, pay attention and take lots of notes.

I predict gimmicky props and cringey dad jokes from Taylor. But given the budget shortfalls at the state and county levels, I also expect some pretty sobering statements and decisions as well as we simply don't have the money to fix all that is broken with MCPS. At least not all at once and in the face of declining enrollments and stagnant growth in the county.

Let's be clear: we- the county and state- do have the money if we would prioritize and fund schools appropriately, as has been done in the past. There just isn't public support or political will to do the necessary tax increases or other-spending decreases to do so.

We have a $1.5 billion shortfall at the state level. What kind of pocket change can be found in the couch cushions to close that kind of gap?

At the county level: We JUST raised taxes in 2023 https://dcist.com/story/23/05/25/md-montgomery-county-council-property-taxes-hike/

You think there's more appetite or willingness to raise property taxes AGAIN in the face of our county being decimated by DOGE and all of the chaos at the White House?

And even if we could muster that political will up, WHY should anyone feel good about pouring more money into MCPS with all of its systemic failures and incompetence?

MCPS has been a problem that seemingly no amount of money can fix.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

This is a disgusting and nonsensical threat. Screentime hasn't saved MCPS any money.

If you don't want computers teaching kids, then we need teachers to teach kids. Those cost money.

We are currently paying for teachers, but they are putting kids in front of screens instead of teaching. I have seen zero indication MCPS intends to stop this practice under any circumstances including increased funding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

These conversations also make it like everything is the same since 1985. There is greater technology now than in 1985. There is a larger number of students. More is required of special education.

The county needs more economic engines for sure, but people also need to understand reality.

If the “reality” is a tax increase, some may accept it but many will not and will eventually move. You can’t force people to pay more taxes.

You can make the people who live here pay taxes.

The people with the most money can easily evade the taxes.

And the rich can easily move (stated many times already in this thread)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

These conversations also make it like everything is the same since 1985. There is greater technology now than in 1985. There is a larger number of students. More is required of special education.

The county needs more economic engines for sure, but people also need to understand reality.

If the “reality” is a tax increase, some may accept it but many will not and will eventually move. You can’t force people to pay more taxes.

You can make the people who live here pay taxes.

The people with the most money can easily evade the taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

These conversations also make it like everything is the same since 1985. There is greater technology now than in 1985. There is a larger number of students. More is required of special education.

The county needs more economic engines for sure, but people also need to understand reality.

If the “reality” is a tax increase, some may accept it but many will not and will eventually move. You can’t force people to pay more taxes.

You can make the people who live here pay taxes.

The people with the most money can easily evade the taxes.

Sounds like something we should work on

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

These conversations also make it like everything is the same since 1985. There is greater technology now than in 1985. There is a larger number of students. More is required of special education.

The county needs more economic engines for sure, but people also need to understand reality.

If the “reality” is a tax increase, some may accept it but many will not and will eventually move. You can’t force people to pay more taxes.

You can make the people who live here pay taxes.

The people with the most money can easily evade the taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

These conversations also make it like everything is the same since 1985. There is greater technology now than in 1985. There is a larger number of students. More is required of special education.

The county needs more economic engines for sure, but people also need to understand reality.

If the “reality” is a tax increase, some may accept it but many will not and will eventually move. You can’t force people to pay more taxes.

You can make the people who live here pay taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

This is a disgusting and nonsensical threat. Screentime hasn't saved MCPS any money.

If you don't want computers teaching kids, then we need teachers to teach kids. Those cost money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, what is really infuriating is that past generations understood the importance of education and accepted that the nature of education inherently means costs will go up *faster* than general inflation. That's reflected in the long-term trends in education funding over the last century.

This isn't a new issue. We just now have taxpayers who are unwilling to give the next generation the same benefits they received. Right around 2010 was when this shifted dramatically.

It's not just the immediate impacts to kids that we should be worried about. Education has facilitated the growth in science and technology that drives our economy. We're digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole because some boomers don't like taxes.

I'm looking at per pupil spending numbers (https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OMB/Resources/Files/omb/pdfs/FY26/psprec/10-MontgomeryCountyPublicSchools-FY2026-REC-Publication-Report.pdf) and adjusting them for inflation. They don't support your assertions.'

Using the numbers in the linked document and the BLS CPI calculator, this is what I found for inflation adjusted per pupil funding amounts in November 2025 dollars:

1984-1985: $13,398
1989-1990: $16,305
1994-1995: $15,287
1999-2000: $16,244
2004-2005: $19,630
2009-2010: $23,427
2014-2015: $20,522
2019-2020: $20,477
2024-2025: $21,058
2025-2026: $22,644

The current year per pupil funding is 69% higher than 1985 per pupil funding in November 2025 dollars, and 39% higher than per pupil funding in 2000 in November 2025 dollars. Then in the 2000s Doug Duncan went on a massive spending spree, which surprise surprise was not sustainable. Per pupil funding was at a high in 2010, but with the recession, we couldn't keep that up. We are approaching another recession. It is not going to be pretty.

That's my point. When you look back over the past 100 years, you'll see a clear trend in education going up faster than inflation. Unless you want more and more screen time, the nature of education means it needs to. The main cost is labor, labor costs go up faster than inflation, and you don't want ratios to explode.

That changed in 2010, where we saw funding drop, only recently starting to catch back up. But now we're 15 years behind where we need to be. You can't blame that on the recession, because it kept going after the recession.

This is a disgusting and nonsensical threat. Screentime hasn't saved MCPS any money.