Local Funding

Since the adoption of Proposal A in march of 1994, our community has not had much direct control of our school funding. The idea had been to provide more equitable funding for all students in the state as well as to relieve property taxes. What has happened is some districts, especially in the Detroit suburbs, receive up to 85% more money per pupil than those districts (like TCAPS) receiving the minimum foundation grant. Last year Traverse City received $7,085 per student while Bloomfield Hills was given $12,220 and Birmingham $12,140. I appreciate the efforts of TCAPS staff members to help organize Citizens for Equity, a group that has done much to promote awareness of inequity in both Lansing and communities statewide. Unfortunately, it will take years to effect real change at the State level and our schools need money immediately.

While our executive team at Administration has lamented over and over the state funding issue and has now co-opted the Citizens for Equity group, I have yet to hear any solutions from them. I was taught that endlessly complaining about a problem doesn't get anyone very far, but ideas for change do. That is why I am organizing an educational foundation to support TCAPS.

By creating an educational foundation and establishing an endowment, we could control school funding locally and provide a funding mechanism independent of the State. I have researched the huge endowment funds at Yale and Harvard ($22-30 billion) as well as the much more modest foundations that spend nearly what they bring in every year, which at many programs is between $50,000 and $150,000. The common element is the ability of the fund to provide monetary support for its beneficiary institution. The endowment structure is what I am interested in, with the idea of investing the donations and spending a portion of the interest each year while the principal continues to grow. Most endowments at schools across the country spend between 4% and 6% of the endowment balance each year, allowing that fund to grow from interest on principal as well as new donations. This way there will be more money to spend in 5, 10, 15 years than there is now.

Some of the uses for the funds could be: elementary foreign language, curriculum development and support, staff professional development, new textbooks, enrichment classes and opportunities, and really anything the school district can't or won't find the money for.

In order to establish the endowment and get it going, there would need to be fundraising obviously, and quite a bit of it. One idea I have was inspired by Bob Sutherland, owner of Cherry Republic. Bob started charging a 1% voluntary, refundable "tax" on all sales, which he then contributes to farm and land preservation funds. Over the last few years, he has contributed over $400,000 through these efforts. Could we do something like this, but community wide? Think about how little 1% of your lunch bill would be. Maybe 7 cents? Now, over the course of a year, 1% of sales at a restaurant might add up to be very significant. Obviously, not everyone would care to participate, but imagine if 50 or 100 businesses agreed to try it out for a year. The only cost to the business owner would be bookkeeping/collecting, which would be a generous donation to the fund in and of itself.

What do you think? Any ideas or suggestions or offers to help?

Grade configuration

So, here are my main concerns: Are we making the right decisions for our kids and community? Are we being fiscally responsible? Where is the proof?

While nearly every other district in the state does it, I have yet to see any studies demonstrating the marginal educational benefit of moving 9th graders to Senior High or 6th graders to Junior High. If this is really the very best thing for our students, then fantastic, I'm on board. But I want to see the proof first. Suddenly there are estimates of $6 million in renovations per high school to accommodate freshman, estimates that according to Dr. Dean on June 4th, had been at $0. What changed? I know I have a huge problem with spending $12 million on two schools that are 10 years and effectively 9 years old. The reason for the move, provided by Administration, is to accommodate new State high school graduation requirements, yet those requirements have absolutely no impact on 9th graders. Why are we asking students and families to drastically alter their routines without proof?

In addition to the renovation costs are the expenses related to moving to a trimester system at high school. This idea has been presented to allow students the opportunity to take more elective classes. OK, but at a cost of $400,000-$500,000 per year, it would completely offset the imaginary savings of closing one elementary school. (that's another thing the district has yet to demonstrate) If we don't have the money to address curriculum issues, have to cut library staff and funding, and close schools, perhaps instituting this new program at this time is inappropriate.

The Board of Education accepted the recommendation of the Administration in May to change grade configuration with no more than the Admin's word as proof. To me, that is not acceptable. As our schools are configured now, ninth graders are accommodated at the junior highs without renovations necessary. If we have no funding, let's not create more bills for ourselves.

Below is a link to a recent Duke University study on benefits of junior high/elementary schools vs. middle schools. Very interesting.

http://www.pubpol.duke.edu/research/papers/SAN07-01.pdf

Great Links For Other Election information

To read more about all of the candidates,

www.SaveBerthaVos.com
www.lwvgta.org

Thank you to both groups for supporting the dialogue on these issues.