180 likes | 197 Views
Sen. Will Brownsberger discusses the unfair results of the FY13 education aid reforms and proposes options to rectify the situation. This analysis highlights the disadvantages faced by communities like Waltham and suggests a ceiling on the gap between target and required local contributions as a fair solution. Various funding options are presented to address the cost implications.
E N D
Fixing a Local Aid Glitch Discretionary Decisions in the Implementation of 2006 Education Aid Reforms
Results still unfair in FY13 Note, other similar examples can be found – e.g., Belmont vs. Watertown. Sen. Will Brownsberger
The Transition Gap Sen. Will Brownsberger
Dropping Down Payment Aid in the Financial Crunch Sen. Will Brownsberger
Waltham has fared poorly because (a) it was among the most disadvantaged under the old formula and (b) in the crunch, we chose Effort Reduction over Down Payment. Sen. Will Brownsberger
Options to get Waltham to 13.25% of FB (13.25% gets Waltham $203,549 increase or 2.9% on $7,068,165 FY12 Aid.) Sen. Will Brownsberger
Options to Offset $10.8m in Cost Sen. Will Brownsberger
Summary of Analysis • Elimination of Down Payment Aid while continuing effort reduction disproportionately disadvantaged those communities that (a) have above-target RLC and (b) were most disadvantaged by pre-reform aid model (Waltham, others), especially those (c) at the maximum target RLC of 82.5%. • Fairest solution is to place a ceiling on the gap between target contribution and required local contribution, so increasing aid for those furthest below target aid level at all wealth levels. Sen. Will Brownsberger
Funding Options Summary Note: All options shown provide standard grandfathering of FY12 aid. A 2% initial base cut would cover the $43.9 million cost of going fully to target RLCs. Sen. Will Brownsberger