Legislation calls for new funding formula for special education
Posted: Monday, June 25, 2012 5:00 am | Updated: 6:52 am, Mon Jun 25, 2012.
Posted on June 25, 2012
The General Assembly is close to reforming the way Pennsylvania school districts are funded for special education.
Currently, districts receive up to 16 percent of their special education costs from the state.
Senate Bill 1115, sponsored by Pat Browne, a Lehigh County Republican, has a two-tiered approach to direct more funding to districts whose students have a greater need.
The legislation, co-sponsored by area Sens. Stewart Greenleaf, R-12, Bob Mensch, R-24, and Tommy Tomlinson, R-6, would require a 12-member commission to develop a new funding formula and sets up three categories for students receiving special education funding: Least intensive services, middle range of services, and most intensive range of services.
The measure requires the Department of Education to develop parameters for districts to submit a special education plan.
There’s also a “hold harmless” provision in the legislation, meaning no district can get fewer dollars than it currently receives, even if its special education needs shrink. So the new formula would only take into account new state money for special education.
That money has been frozen for five years.
“To me, this just makes a lot of sense,” said state Rep. Paul Clymer, R-145, chairman of the House Education Committee, which unanimously approved the bill last week. “There has to be a change. Sixteen percent is such an unfair way to treat school districts.”
Central Bucks, for example, estimates it will spend $36 million for special education in 2012-13. The state will pick up less than $7.3 million of that burden.
The $36 million does not include the cost of psychologists, guidance counselors or nursing services, said David Matyas, the district’s business manager.
“This is a good bill,” said state Rep. John Galloway, D-140, a former Pennsbury school board member, who added that “unfunded mandates” make it difficult for districts to manage their budgets.
Another Democrat, Steve Santarsiero, D-31, said “the way we fund special education needs to be changed so that it more closely resembles the need.”
Browne said that’s the idea of his bill.
“It presents an opportunity for us to change the system that I believe has been out of place for the needs of our special education students for 20 or 30 years,” he said.
When the bill passed the Senate on a 46-1 vote earlier this month, the lone nay came from Chuck McIlhinney, R-10.
McIlhinney, who said he’s been “complaining for 15 years about the basic education formula,” has concerns with what ingredients the formula might incorporate.
“If the funding formula includes the wealth of the area I’ll have a hard time supporting it,” he said. “Why should Central Bucks get less money to educate a student with autism than they do in Philadelphia?”
McIlhinney said he didn’t “rail” against the bill. “I’m on board with the concept. … I don’t know who’s going to be on that commission, and I don’t want our schools hurt because of the wealth factor.”
Clymer, the House education chairman, predicted the bill would be passed.
7 comments:
If a District doesn't like a funding formula, is it always an option to just not pay?
If so, how smart is that, and how much will the lawyer fees be?
Yes.
Not very although they (SOC + admin) will try to spin it that way.
We will never find out.
Off topic, but
BRISTOL SCHOOLSNo school tax hike in Bristol next year
Story
Comments
ShareShare
Print Create a hardcopy of this page Font Size: Default font size Larger font size
.
Posted: Monday, June 25, 2012 5:00 am | Updated: 6:46 am, Mon Jun 25, 2012.
By GEMA MARIA DUARTE Staff writer | 0 comments
Posted on June 25, 2012
by Gema Duarte
Bristol residents can breathe a sigh of relief: School taxes aren’t going up for the next school year.
The owner of the borough’s average assessed property of $16,400 will pay about $2,526 in school taxes next year.
The school board passed the $21 million budget unanimously last week, with a total millage of 154.
But balancing the budget didn’t come easy.
Cuts had to be made, including the industrial arts program, a psychologist and the pupil services director. Kindergarten was cut from a full-day to a half-day program, a move that led to the termination of one teacher.
School board members Charles Groff and John D’Angelo voted against the furlough of the psychologist, even though they voted to pass the budget.
For the school year that just ended, the district had a $21.2 million spending plan, which included a 16-mill increase that cost the average homeowner about $262 more than the previous year’s rate.
At the beginning of the year, the district faced an $898,968 deficit, which was brought on by cost increases such as employee health insurance and pension fund costs. The health insurance bill was slashed by about $160,000 when the district joined the Bucks-Montgomery Health Care Consortium.
How to figure out school taxes?
One mill is equal to $1 of tax for every $1,000 of assessed property value. To calculate your tax, multiply the millage figure by your assessed property value. Remember to add three decimal places to the millage figure to get the accurate tax. For example, a 25-mill increase on a home assessed at $5,000 amounts to .025 times $5,000 or $125 more in taxes.
Thanks. The article states:
"The health insurance bill was slashed by about $160,000 when the district joined the Bucks-Montgomery Health Care Consortium."
Morrisville didn't join the consortium, correct? The recommendation from the Administration was to wait. Will we see comparable or better savings in our health insurance?
Bristol had to cut back to 1/2 day K. I am adamantly opposed to that for Morrisville.
I think there are two motions on the agenda for this week. One to stick with the current and Insurance and one to switch to Bucks/Mont
Oh, OK, thanks. I mistakenly thought the vote had already happened.
Post a Comment