What's behind the city's budget pain
Martin O'Malley was not a popular guy at last night's city school board budget work session, where details were provided on at least $21 million in proposed new state cuts, maybe more depending on whose documents are in hand. Board chair Brian Morris, an ally of O'Malley when the governor was mayor, called it "outrageous" and "absurd" and "very, very hurtful" that the state would put the city schools in such a position. Dr. Alonso said that, when the two neediest districts in the state (Baltimore and Prince George's) take the bulk of the cuts, "something smells." And board member George VanHook called the state action "unacceptable" and "unconscionable." He says that unless the city schools stand up for themselves, "we will continue to get what we have always gotten."
The governor is fighting back today, reaffirming his commitment to funding education. But given that state funding of city schools has never met the official definition of adequacy, I could see the Bradford school funding case ending up back in court if these cuts stand.
O'Malley and Alonso spoke this morning, and Alonso asked him to reconsider how the funding formulas are calculated so as not to disproportionately hurt the neediest districts.
There are three major factors contributing to the city schools' budget pain:
1) O'Malley proposes changing the payment structure when severely disabled students require private school placements. Right now, the state pays 80 percent of the cost and local school districts pay 20 percent. The proposal is to change to 50-50.
2) O'Malley proposes a reduction of the phase-in of GCEI, or Thornton's geographic cost index, which gives more money to school districts with a high cost of living. He might also take back GCEI money for the current year.
3) While the governor says he's leaving the base allocation to schools the same, he's now including in that base the cost of teacher pensions, which the state continues to cover in its own budget.
Baltimoresun.com's 
Comments
I don't care what convoluted "formula" O'Malley is using to come up with the school cuts, if the result is that Baltimore City and PG County are cut $58 million while Montgomery County is INCREASED $27 million he needs a NEW formula!
The rich whites get richer and the poor blacks get poorer? Not cool.
Posted by: Adam | January 23, 2009 8:26 PM
I'll start here by saying that I don't believe that money is always the answer. However, as the recent reports have shown, money does mean something - it seems to have helped Maryland reach that #1 status.
My big problem here is lack of recognition that education plays into every other sector. Funding schools appropriately affects long-term choices for State government. The commonly cited reference goes to the reduction in costs for public safety and juvenile justice problems. But quality education also leads to lower state payments in welfare, Medicaid, workforce training, etc. This education budget reduction is a short-sighted way to accomplish a short-term goal (cutting costs). I hope that voters remember this come 2010. Although I've always been a supporter of the Governor, I find this policy choice extremely disturbing.
Posted by: Bill | January 23, 2009 8:48 PM
Its amazing to me that the Governor would attempt to insinuate that he is fully funding Thornton. Just because he keeps saying its true doesn't actually make it true. The GCEI was an integral part of the Thornton Commission's recommendation. Additionally the City Schools didn't receive an inflationary increase this year and won't receive one under the O'Malley budget for next year. Dr. Alonso's statement that Governor O'Malley is rolling back Thornton is patently TRUE and it must be understood that the Governor is balancing the State budget on the backs of the poorest students in the State.
Posted by: Sue | January 23, 2009 10:42 PM
The BCPSS aka City Schools stakeholders and community was not a popular group at last night's city school board Budget Update work session. Why might you ask? That is a result of the Budget Update work session was not publicized to the public school community and citizens.
I attended the work session at central office which was supposed to have been a scheduled Parent Community Advisory Board (PCAB) meeting but the group which is supposed to represent all city school parents regarding parent involvement. They PCAB pre-postponed their public meeting unannounced and forgot about the critical public and city parents input involvement at the City Schools budget update work session.
Now the City Schools operations and school board get to claim they made a formal presentation to PCAB.
The School Board and CEO's communication operations PR were equally irresponsible. "We do not yet have GREAT SCHOOLS. We have inherited GREAT KIDS."
Posted by: Interested & Engaged Parent of City Schools | January 25, 2009 9:08 AM
Interested and Engaged....
I got an email from PCAB that annouced the workshop on January 22nd and an open forum scheduled for Feburary 5th.
Posted by: OverTheTop | January 26, 2009 11:59 AM
OweMalley lies-
so what else is new!
Here's a suggestion why don't the state employees making 6 figures or more take a pay cut for the greater good!
Right!
Posted by: jay | January 27, 2009 3:17 PM