MANHATTAN, Kan. - Monday 22 November was a black day for our state and our public education system. Declining tax revenues did what the conservatives in the legislature have been unable to achieve as Gov. Parkinson cut an additional $36 million in funding to the state's public education system and a recommendation not to fund the $155.8 million increase based on revised estimates of property tax revenue and student enrollment.
As a result of the Governor's action on Monday, the base state aid per pupil for the current school year has been cut $421 per pupil. Kansas has approximately 455,000 students on our K-12 public education system. You do the math. Education organizations like KNEA and Kansas Families for Education believe this is as deep as K-12 cuts can go without jeopardizing federal Recovery Act (ARRA) funds.
But the cuts don't end there. The Governor also cut $85.9 million in supplemental general state aid from K-12 but replaced that money with federal ARRA funds. Robbing Peter to pay Paul; the replacement funds are from the 2011 ARRA funding. While this action balances this year's budget, it reduces the ARRA funds available in the event of continuing problems with next year's budget.
Kansas schools will now face serious challenges. While some may be able to turn to contingency reserve funds, but many districts do not have adequate funds in this category and will be force to cut student programs, fire teachers, raise the number of students per class and close buildings.
You can read the Governor's budget allotment press release here.
Questions about the tax exemptions the legislature have passed out to corporate interests over the past five years or programs like the STAR bonds and how they contribute to the current crisis isn't a topic most are willing to broach. However, Kathy Cook of Kansas Families for Education put it like this: "Are tax exemptions to benefit a few big businesses really worth a Kindergartner sitting in a class of 40, a senior going hungry because their meal program has been discontinued, or a disabled Kansan denied basic services because we have gutted SRS? This is where we are at folks, we have to decide what is more important."
But the Appropriations Committee would not hear anything about the need to cut their corporate welfare system. Instead they wanted to hear from their own kind and to provide them with just what they wanted to hear was State Board of Education member Walt Chappell and discredited former State Education Commissioner, Bob Corkins.
Chappell called for a massive consolidation of school districts that he claims would save the state $300 million - as if dollars are they only item of concern.
Kansas school districts employ about 68,000 teachers, professional support staff (counseling, social work, librarians, health professionals), administrators, and other support staff (bus drivers, cooks, secretaries). This constitutes 3.6% of the total employment in the state and provides 4.5% of wages paid in the state. In many areas of the state, the local school district is a major contributor to the economic life of the community and sustains other economic activities in the community.
According to a KNEA press release Chappell went on to suggest that teachers don't work enough and ought to be in their buildings with students eight hours every day.
Such propaganda is right out of the social conservatives' play book who have tried for years to discredit public school teachers in order to advance their agenda of diverting public funding to private - usually faith-based- schools.
The NEA conducted a national survey in 1997 in which the average contract required 7.3 hours of work per day and teachers reported working an average of 2.5 hours per day extra on uncompensated work for school. More recent studies indicate that teachers' contracts now stipulate an average of 8 - 9 hours per day plus additional uncompensated work.
State Representative Owen Donohoe (R-Shawnee), eagerly agreed with Chappell on the non-working teacher point, asserting "that one can hear a pin drop in school buildings by 3:15 because they are vacant." I'd like to invite Rep. Donohoe to visit some schools like Northview Elementary in Manhattan or Cooper Elementary in Derby that begin their day at 6:30 am and close their doors 12 - 13 hours later.
Corkins demanded that schools report spending on a building-by-building basis to prove they are using money efficiently and spending it equally for each student. Once again, Corkins wants schools and the state to spend money on external consultants and not on the children setting in the desks. Every study on school efficiency thus far has shown that school districts are using their funds efficiently and getting the biggest bang they can out of each buck. But because these reports do not say what the conservatives want to hear, they are once again calling for wasting money at a moment the state has nary a dime to waste.
Corkins claimed that adopting building based budgets could insulate the state from a lawsuit that several districts are working to bring against the state once again over school funding. Since Corkins is a lobbyist for the Kansas Legislative Education and Research (KLEAR), made up of conservative lawmakers in the legislature, one could cry "conflict of interest," and Rep. Doug Gatewood eloquently did just that as Corkins tried desperately to back track. KFP readers should also note that Corkins is employed by Kansas Policy Center, also known as the "Flint Hills Policy Center."
It is bad enough that these are the individuals the committee asked to hear from rather than making it open to the public, but what is worse is what the Chair, Representative Kevin Yoder and Vice Chair, Representative Jason Watkins had to say after the meeting.
Watkins said: "Apparently, we have yet to get to the bone of excess spending in government, because we continue to cut and we continue to cut and these agencies stay open." Yoder added: "What we didn't see and hoped to see were real, significant reductions in government spending."
Looks like the 2010 Legislative session is going to be another exercise in futility when it comes to seeing responsible government in action.
Special thanks to the Kansas NEA and Kansas Families for Education for their press releases used in writing this story.
Christopher, thanks for the time you've spent putting this together.
Parkinson was being (unintentionally) hailed on KCUR public radio as some sort of non-partisan, even-handed governor who was caught between a rock and a hard place. Maybe he is, but you're absolutely right: the corporatists and their Republican lap dogs will temporarily get their way. But, as always, the religious right and free marketeers will reap the whirlwind of their own making, all the while complaining that they're victims yet again.
Watch for the pitchforks to start rising next year.
It is without a doubt that school consolidation must become an real issue to be discussed. Without a doubt there are too many small school districts in the state and many need to be consolidated. I realize it's a tough decision, but we cannot afford to support the number of districts we have. I'd much rather spend our money educating kids, than paying administrator salaries.
I was a child when the legislature forced consolidation on Kansas schools in 1966 and remember first hand the emotional scars it left on people. I think it directly resulted in the economic decline of my hometown, which up to that point had a vibrant main street.
I think it is best when people make the decision to consolidate on their own and several districts have done just that over the past few years and more will be doing it. But it is best when that decision is made at the local level.
At the same time, research shows us that the best education occurs in classrooms of less than 18 students, optional number being 12. Students in such learning environments have higher academic achievement levels, fewer behavioral problems, and are less likely to abuse drugs and become involved in gang violence.
I also think, as the 2001 Augenblick and Myers study stated, that some districts in the state need to be broken up. Research shows that high schools with 6,000+ students in them do not provide quality education, contribute to high drop out rates and lower academic achievement.
The question is what kind of society do we want: one with a highly educated population with critical thinking skills that contribute to a vibrant democracy, or undereducated drones who are nothing more than interchangeable parts for a corporcracy in a proto-fascist state? Because that is really what the debate over public education is all about.
I don't think that consolidation necessarily means higher class sizes, if anything without consolidation would mean more resources for students and less money spent on administration. I also think there is no causal relationship between consolidating schools and the health of Main Street. I live near several small towns that have schools and still have no real Main St. and the towns are still dying. We need to face the reality that small towns are not growing. Some towns are growing and thriving, while many others are not. Prosperous towns and cities made decisions decades ago that set them apart from their neighbors and therefore are growing. I think the major factor of a health of a town is correlated to their community engagement, progressive ideas and frankly their locale related to a larger town. (A Wal-Mart nearby kills main st.)
Keeping very small schools open is not helping anyone. Small high schools can't offer the necessary curriculum that 21st century students need and certainly can't offer the extracurricular activities their larger counterparts can. 1A ans 2A high schools located near larger schools should not continue to exist. They're doing no one any favors and are costing us money we could spend in better places.