In his proposed revenue shifting plan, called the Local Control Funding Formula, Gov. Brown is not asking that our Culver City USD take a $5M hit in state funding all at once, in one year. His plan, incrementally, would increase the amount of funding taken annually from our District and transfer it to other districts. Our losses would happen slowly, over six years, the time it would take to implement his revenue-shifting plan.
More Than You Think
If our future funding is taken in equal annual increments, starting in fiscal year 2014-15, the Culver City USD would be shorted $840,000 in its state funding. In 2015-16, our schools would continue to lose those dollars from the previous year and lose an additional $840,000. As implementation continues, the amount of monies shifted from the CCUSD in 2017-18 would be about $2.5 million in carryover plus an additional $840,000 on top of that, for an annual total shortage of $3.36 million. By the time Gov. Brown’s Local Control Funding Fornula is fully implemented in 2019-20, the years of continued, annual losses would arithmetically add up to over $17,500,000 in lost revenues for our schools.
Click here to view spreadsheet (PDF).
Once his plan is entirely integrated, the funding difference between the successful and the less successful school districts would widen to a 25 percent gap. The average funding loss to the majority of districts taking a hit would be 14.4 percent less revenue. By contrast, the budgets for districts gaining the shifted funds would be bolstered by 10.7 percent.
Biggest Losers?
The CCUSD budgets more than 80 percent of its state funding for District employee compensation. One would think our District employees would be up in arms because, $17.5 million would be taken out from their negotiating reach, placed in other hands. Further, it means District employees lose access to $14M in compensation.
Searching for His Legacy
As if throwing money at districts is the only missing factor in their equation for student success and will fix the multi-layered problems inherent in these school communities.
Parental View
Understanding the governor’s lopsided proposal from a parent perspective, if your child is going into Culver City Middle School next year, by graduation in six years, the District will not have access to $17.5M of state funding for his or her education.
Dumbing Up = Dumbing Down
In his idyllic search for student equity, is Gov. Brown really only trying to lift those students in need, who are in poor performing schools? Or is he lowering the quality of education for current students in successful districts, thereby in his mind letting all students meet equitable middle, in the midst of mediocrity?
Student-Based Budgeting
There are Students in Need and English-Learners in every district, not just those he has targeted for extra aid. The governor’s Local Control Funding Formula plan falls short of helping every student in need. It only aids those in districts prone to failure.
If the governor truly wanted to help every student in need, every English-learner, he would have proposed targeting each student’s need in a statewide student-based budget.
Other People’s Money
Gov. Brown has yet to discuss what barometer he will use to measure the success or failure of his experiment. Also, what should be done if his scheme is unsuccessful. Will he cut funding if these districts fail to advance student learning? Or will he throw even more money at the schools, dreaming of future success?
Hopefully my avid defense of the Culver City USD’s future funding will not be misconstrued as being against helping all our students achieve the education they deserve. The governor’s plan might not be so bad, except it gets personal when he chooses to lift funds from our children’s education to fund his statewide social experiment.
Mr. Laase may be contacted at GMLaase@aol.com
