Richmond's school district has not been singled out for a cut in funding this fiscal year, they are just one of many school districts that are scratching their collective heads, wondering where the money will come from.
In today's news, the Richmond Times-Dispatch published a statement detailing their research of comments made by Kitty Boitnott, VEA president, on January 23rd. of this year.
On January 23rd. Boitnott said the state has been saving money by lowering public education standards. By cutting biennial funding they have been able to save $1.6 billion through changes to the 'Standards of Quality' funding formula since 2010.
The 'Standards of Quality' is the minimum mandates Virginia sets forth for public education on teacher/pupil ratios, benefits for educators and basic curriculium. This mandate is set by the General Assembly.
Started on July 1, 2010, the General Assembly based their funding results on information from the State Board of Education. By law, Virginia must pay 55% of the overall cost of the 'Standards of Quality funds.
The remaining funding comes from the local school districts, about 40%, and a smaller amount, 10% comes from the federal government. According to Boitnott, the combined obligations would have been %1.6 billion higher if the General Assembly had not taken measures to lower the standards.
The VEA says the figures came from an Education funding report released by the Senate Finance Committee last month. The report detailed 10 areas where reductions were approved. They totaled $1.57 billion.
The Richmond Times-Dispatch, on further research found where an inadvertant mistake had been made in preparing Boitnott's statement. The actual expenditures came to $1.4 billion.
A couple questions have arisen over the report that bear further investigation. One question has to do with the repeal of the reductions. Are they permanent? The state says no, they are temporary.
A spokesman from the VEA says there has never been a time when the General Assembly reversed a funding mandate. Here's another interesting observation. According to the Times-Dispatch, by their calculations, the state is only paying 40% of their share. Does this mean local school districts have to cough up the rest?
Comments