Anonymous wrote:Honestly I would rather keep that $23,000 per pupil and homeschool my children. They’d receive a better education and it would certainly not cost that much.

Anonymous wrote:What is this money for? The regional model or for renovation of schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

No one is advocating cutting funding. MCPS’s operating budget should be kept at $3.6 billion a year, which is astronomical to begin with, and with awful results (57% proficiency on ELA and 36% proficiency on math).

MCPS needs to work with the budget they are given, not add more and more inequitable programs that refuce access.

Flat funding is the same as a cut (because costs rise), everyone knows that, so please don't pretend it isn't.

Costs rise because people are living longer and new medicines and technologies are available to make people live longer and both of those things cost a ton of money. In essence, the pension and retiree healthcare benefits are expanding to cover more years of life. It is very expensive to support an aging population. The problem is young people who will have access to fewer or no retiree benefits as well as other current retirees with lower and fixed incomes and very limited savings are being asked to support with their taxes the benefits for current MCPS retirees. At a minimum, MCPS should integrate their pension with social security.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

No one is advocating cutting funding. MCPS’s operating budget should be kept at $3.6 billion a year, which is astronomical to begin with, and with awful results (57% proficiency on ELA and 36% proficiency on math).

MCPS needs to work with the budget they are given, not add more and more inequitable programs that refuce access.

Flat funding is the same as a cut (because costs rise), everyone knows that, so please don't pretend it isn't.

Spending $23,000 per student is at the HIGHEST end of national norms on spending per student. The result of this spending is badly educated students.

Pouring more money into magnet programs won’t fix the problem of MCPS not focusing its energy on teaching the core subjects well.

Keeping spending flat would force MCPS to work with the generous amount it is already given.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

No one is advocating cutting funding. MCPS’s operating budget should be kept at $3.6 billion a year, which is astronomical to begin with, and with awful results (57% proficiency on ELA and 36% proficiency on math).

MCPS needs to work with the budget they are given, not add more and more inequitable programs that refuce access.

Flat funding is the same as a cut (because costs rise), everyone knows that, so please don't pretend it isn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

No one is advocating cutting funding. MCPS’s operating budget should be kept at $3.6 billion a year, which is astronomical to begin with, and with awful results (57% proficiency on ELA and 36% proficiency on math).

MCPS needs to work with the budget they are given, not add more and more inequitable programs that refuce access.

Flat funding is the same as a cut (because costs rise), everyone knows that, so please don't pretend it isn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

No one is advocating cutting funding. MCPS’s operating budget should be kept at $3.6 billion a year, which is astronomical to begin with, and with awful results (57% proficiency on ELA and 36% proficiency on math).

MCPS needs to work with the budget they are given, not add more and more inequitable programs that refuce access.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

Most of the increased costs relate to compensation for staff including healthcare and pension costs.

Then, they need to readjust for those costs. County employees don't get as good health care or a pension. Make it equal for all employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Yeah, no, I think the programs plan is poorly designed and want them to stop it for now to revise. But I'm not going to advocate against my kids' interests or the rest of the kids of this county by cutting funding to their schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

The only chance that the regional model won't go into effect is if there is a budget consequence to MCPS for putting it into place. People should absolutely be lobbying against MCPS getting more money if they move forward with the plan.

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.

Most of the increased costs relate to compensation for staff including healthcare and pension costs.

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is a good forum for folks to speak up at regarding their concerns about the regional model, but you don't have to oppose MCPS spending increases to do so. MCPS always needs increases just to keep even with services from the previous year, and usually asks for additional money for improvements (of which the system needs many, including reversing the class size increases.)

The ask should not be for no increases to MCPS. It should be saying that MCPS needs to show the county that it will not be wasting money on a half-baked, rushed program plan if it wants any funding increases.