Below are two revenue spreadsheets contained in the 2011-2012 BOE Budget proposal. Approximately $13,082,520 is being estimated as revenue in this budget request some of which, such as the Federal Teacher Stimulus is already factored into the budget.
The first spreadsheet is a Revenue Summary Sheet showing the various sources of estimated revenue contained in the budget (it does not show revenue from student activity fees/parking fees, that will be forthcoming soon in another topic). Click images to enlarge:
The second spreadsheet is a breakdown of the specific grant revenue contained within the budget:
The First Train Wreck (ECS Underfunding): Regarding ECS funding which accounts for $9.3M of the revenue, CT has been using Federal Stimulus money between 2009 - 2011 to fund 14% of it's obligation to the Education Cost Sharing grant to municipalities. This Federal funding expires in July.
Should CT not be able to replenish this 14% shortfall, it means Cheshire will lose approximately $1.4M in funding for education. This is the other "train wreck" in the making that may hit us very soon.
The Second Train Wreck (Teacher Stimulus Gone): The $540K Federal Teacher Stimulus is a one-time grant and will be used up in 2011-2012 budget.
The Third Train Wreck (ECS Formula Change): Even with grants/revenue Cheshire taxpayers are paying for the lion's share of education. Without these grants, it could be a lot worse. Considering that CT Dept. of Education is re-defining the ECS formula, Cheshire will be receiving less ECS grant money. Already, the committee on ECS is proposing to change the formula to shift more ECS grant money away from "wealthy towns" such as Cheshire to less-wealthy cities such as Bridgeport, New Haven, Waterbury for example. However, the tax burden will not be lessened on Cheshire.
10 comments:
The "Tuition-Other" revenue for 2011/12 is $16,765 which is about 1/2 of what it was in 2001/02. This is the money out of town people pay to have their kids go to Cheshire Schools, correct? If the per pupil cost/year is $11,000plus and they're supposed to pay the full amount, how could it be $16,765? How closely is this monitored? I hear more cases of out of towners using relatives addresses in town to get around this.
Also, isn't there some "Title 9" revenue that the boe receives? I thought they voted every year whether or not to accept the money. I don't see it during any year.
How many "project open choice" kids do we have? We only get $27.5K and in 2000/01 we got $70K. Does that mean we have hardly any kids or do they just not reimburse us like they used to?
One man's revenue is money from another man's paycheck(taxes).
Where is the revenue from ticket sales for all of the sports?
I think the ticket sale money goes to the "Booster Club." Who knows who controls the "club" and who knows how much $ is collected & where it actually goes. It would be nice to know.
Another bonus of living in Cheshire is the high tix price for a high school event...you go to some schools that charge less and some not at all...
Jesse Buchanan is reporting that Senator Looney (D-New Haven) wants to change the ECS formula to include prisoners in their last town of residence (not the prison where they reside).
It'd be a $2.4 million hit to Cheshire's ECS grant. I doubt it'd pass -- in full -- this year. But it wouldn't shock me if there was a phase-in that passes.
As glad as I am that Gaffey is gone, I'm guessing he was Looney's roadblock for years.
And if the bill does pass... I wonder how Looney intends to count prisoners from other states?
Tim, I've been following the State Dept of Ed commission meetings on changing the ECS formula. It's coming sooner than we think. The discussions seem to center on two main themes:
(1) Hartford should be fully funding it's obligation to towns and cities but the committee agrees it's not feasible unless more money is found in the budget.
(2) More money needs to find it's way to poorer performing school districts and urban school districts. The 'wealth' factor in the ECS formula will change to accomodate this shift in funding.
It's of no surprise to me that Looney is trying to change the prisoner residency variable in the formula because unless some serious influx of cash makes it's way into Hartford soon...the only way to fully fund ECS obligations is to shift money from 'wealthy' towns like Cheshire to less wealthy towns.
In other words, ECS funding will be 'balanced' by rebalancing what's already available. And yes, Towns like Cheshire will take the biggest hits.
I have been in contact with our reps and stated our town's opposition to this. If and when there is a public hearing I will attend along with Michael Milone and likely Dr. Florio. We have the support thus far of Al Adinolfi, Vicki Nardello & Joe Markley. I'm certain Mary Fritz will support us.
It is lunacy on Looney's part to think fellons no longer residing in New Haven yet residing in a prison in Cheshire some have a greater impact on New Haven services. The only equivalency is that both communities are freed from the impact of criminal activity by the individual in their respective communities.
Tim Slocum
Since Looney opened this discussion, I'm wondering about his rationale for it.
Rather than adjust the ECS formula, perhaps he could simply go to Congress and have them redefine the census for the "residence" of a prisoner?
Or maybe the ECS formula could be adjusted so that it's not based on the constitutional 10 year census... but on CTs annual October 1 student population census?
But would such efforts achieve his goal? Or is he really just trying to redistribute more wealth to New Haven?
Good luck Tim. But a couple small towns -- Cheshire, Enfield, Summers, etc. -- against a bunch of big cities? I'm not holding my breath.
And don't forget that just last year, MM was carrying water for John Destefano and his regional sales tax.
Maybe MM could cash in a few of those chips and get JDS to testify against this change to the ECS formula?!
Post a Comment