This post has been updated to include revised numbers for the Texas wildfire response budget.
For those looking for information on the Central Texas fires, Lisa Birkman at the Williamson County Conservative Examiner just posted information on fire damage in Wilco, and Michele Samuelson at Blue Dot Blues has great information on the widespread impact, as well as important resources for assistance.
If you have not already done so, consider registering your cell phone with the Capital Area Council of Governments so that you will receive phone notification if your area is threatened. Unfortunately, the registration won't take effect immediately, but it could save your life in a future crisis.
Finally, while some are claiming eeeevillll Republicans cut the Texas wildfire response budget, Lawrence Person has the facts at his BattleSwarm Blog. Apparently, Governor Perry and the state legislature actually increased the allocation by about 80%, from $109 million in 2010-11 to $196.2 million in 2012-13.
Please be safe and keep praying for those in danger.
Showing posts with label Texas budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas budget. Show all posts
Monday, September 5, 2011
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Texas Taxpayer Savings Grants
The Taxpayer Savings Grant proposal is a voluntary program that allows parents to transfer a child from a public school to a private school, with a TS grant to help pay tuition. For each student who voluntarily takes a grant, the state saves an average of $3,429. Furthermore, the public school would not have expenditures for that child (think smaller classes,) but the school would keep a portion of funding.
Currently, the average total cost per student in Texas public schools is $11,567. The proposed grants would be calculated on maintenance and operations expenditures alone ($8,572 per student) and therefore each grant is equal to only 60% of the M&O expense, which is $5,143 per student. The state saves the other 40% of the M&O expense, which is $3,429 per student. Additionally, the difference between operation and total expenditures is about $3000 per student. So even though the student is no longer attending, the difference of $3000 remains in the Texas public school system and actually results in an increase in per pupil funding.
Not only would the Taxpayer Savings Grants save money for the State of Texas while increasing per pupil funding for public schools, the grants would allow parents to choose the school best suited to their child's needs. I have long been a critic of the one-size-fits all paradigm that dominates our nation's approach to education. Different children have different educational needs and it is madness to think there is only one way to educate a child. I often hear teachers complain about a lack of parental involvement, so let's get parents involved by allowing them a voice in their own child's education.
The analysts who created this program are hoping the Texas House will be able to attach the measure to legislation before the session ends. With savings projected for the State, the Texas public school system, and taxpayers, this seems like a win-win-win deal. It is unfortunate that the proposal comes so late in the session and I do not predict passage, but it is an idea that deserves consideration.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Save Our Teachers? Or Something Else?
Here's one of the first photos I've received from today's Save Our Schools rally...no comment necessary.
Thanks to D. Greer for this photo.
Thanks to D. Greer for this photo.
"Keep The Teachers, Cut the Fat"
While liberal-progressive groups in Texas have been stirring up mass hysteria about budget cuts, more level-headed Texans have been exposing the truth about education spending in our state. The recently launched Protect the Classroom website lists important truths about Texas education spending, and now Americans for Prosperity has launched Red Apple Project to show district-by-district, how much of our 'education' dollars are spent outside the classroom.
AFP has also revealed how the supposedly non-partisan 'Save Texas Schools' group is nothing more than a front group for some very left-leaning folks. Save Texas Schools is holding a rally in Austin today, supposedly to save the children from those eeeevilll Republicans, but the group's ties to arch liberal George Soros are indicative of a much more sophisticated agenda. From yesterday's Americans For Prosperity Release:
It will be interesting to see just how many parents and teachers have been duped by this group, for indeed the education bureaucracy has hostages and they aren't afraid to use them. Hopefully, now that left-leaning media no longer hold a monopoly on the news, more Texans are better informed about education spending. Rather than continue to throw money at anything labeled 'education spending,' we need to listen to retired school teacher Collen Vera's call to "keep the teachers, cut the fat."
AFP has also revealed how the supposedly non-partisan 'Save Texas Schools' group is nothing more than a front group for some very left-leaning folks. Save Texas Schools is holding a rally in Austin today, supposedly to save the children from those eeeevilll Republicans, but the group's ties to arch liberal George Soros are indicative of a much more sophisticated agenda. From yesterday's Americans For Prosperity Release:
"None other than the George Soros crony, Fred Lewis, serves on the steering committee and is co-chair of strategic partnerships for Save Texas Schools. Lewis is the founder of Texans Together Education Fund, which received $80,000 from Soros’ Open Society Institute in 2009. Texans Together spawned the notorious Houston Votes organization that came under fire for submitting thousands of fraudulent voter registration cards in Harris County in 2010.”A perusal of the Save Texas Schools website indicates that they believe there is not one iota of waste anywhere in the education budget, and that any perceived deficiencies in public education can be solved by, wait for it.... more money.
“Lewis served as president of the left-wing organization Campaigns for People, which worked to keep large private donations out of campaigns. Brian Donovan was an associate of Lewis’ at Campaigns for People. Donovan, who also worked for the Travis County Democratic Party, is the fundraising co-chair for Save Texas Schools.”
“Clearly the ideologies of these men have been to promote the big-bureaucracy, big spending status quo in which we have one non-teacher for every teacher and fail to focus education spending on the classroom. We believe that throwing more money at a problem does not create solutions. We’ve been increasing the amount of tax dollars going to schools in Texas for decades, only to see a decline in test scores and college-readiness, and an increase in the dropout rate.”
It will be interesting to see just how many parents and teachers have been duped by this group, for indeed the education bureaucracy has hostages and they aren't afraid to use them. Hopefully, now that left-leaning media no longer hold a monopoly on the news, more Texans are better informed about education spending. Rather than continue to throw money at anything labeled 'education spending,' we need to listen to retired school teacher Collen Vera's call to "keep the teachers, cut the fat."
Monday, February 28, 2011
Storm on the Horizon: Leander ISD
Priorities...
Previously I have focused my research on Round Rock ISD since that is where the bulk of my property tax dollars go, but it seems a major storm is brewing for another Williamson County school district: Leander ISD.
The Leander district has fewer students than Round Rock (30,321 compared to Round Rock's 43,008,) but according to Texas Education Agency reports, the LISD property tax rate is among the highest in the state at $1.4548. Superintendent Brett Champion, enjoys a salary of $194,399, along with other benefits, including a $1,000 per month car allowance and extra paid vacation time (beyond the usual paid breaks in the school year).
Like most Texas districts, teachers make up only 52% of LISD employees, although there are quite a few other non-teacher instructional staff members. Curiously, although 13.4% of students are considered 'Gifted/Talented' and only 4.9% are 'Bilingual/ESL," the district employs 59 Bilingual/ESL teachers, but only 36 Gifted/Talented teachers.
The most disturbing data from LISD's reports, however, are that total district expenditures are a whopping $17,084 per student. Unfortunately for Leander ISD, voters (probably the usual 4-6% that bother to vote in these elections,) have allowed the district to accumulate a shocking $1.2 Billion in bond debt. (You won't find much of this information at the District's website, and the TEA reports are ridiculously difficult to obtain, but I've tried to make them more available at the above links.)
It seems back in 2007, the LISD School Board got a bit giddy, and even though they had just passed a $286 million bond the previous year, they convinced residents to approve a whopping $559 million bond- the largest ever in Central Texas. The bond was purportedly to construct numerous schools, including a new regional sports stadium with a $22.5 million price tag. A second stadium, A.C. Bible, was completely demolished and re-built for about $12 million. While LISD did open the new state-of-the-art Vandegrift High School last year (for $117.6 million) and the John Gupton Stadium , two additional schools will be completed, but will not actually open. The district does not have funds to hire the appropriate staff, which begs the question, why were sports stadiums a higher priority than supposedly much needed schools?
As if such massive borrowing were not disturbing enough, it seems the district has also made an annual habit of tapping their own rainy day funds to balance the budget. In 2008 they used $4 million, in 2009 $5 million, and in 2010 took $5.9 million out of reserve funds to cover expenses. This, in addition to as much as $8 million in stimulus funds, a one-time bump designed to 'save' jobs. And yet, instead of cutting expenses, the board approved an across the board employee raise of 1.5% in 2009 and a 6% increase for the Superintendent in 2010.
Defenders of LISD are anxious to point out how very, very wonderful their schools are; after all, the district is 'recognized' according to the Texas Education Agency. But the painful truth is that 16 of LISD's 37 schools inflated ratings by applying the TPM, or Texas Projection Measure. The controversial provision allows schools to 'deem' students as passing standardized tests if the school predicts they will pass within the next few years. In other words, students who failed are counted as passing. Furthermore, the district has been criticized in recent years for watering down standards for high school students.
The problems facing Leander Independent School District are a cautionary tale for all of us. Focus on federal spending and borrowing isn't going to be enough to save our country from insolvency. We simply cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the way local entities, including school districts, are handling finances. Unfortunately, many residents seem to think, "I entrust my children to them, therefore they must be trustworthy." Sadly, our school districts have failed to manage finances prudently.
As expected LISD is considering all options, including significant tax increases. What taxpayers and elected officials should be doing however, is demanding accountability and reforms to the way education funds are spent. If allowed to maintain this dangerous course of tax-borrow-and-spend without real accountability, our education industry will slowly crush local economies and saddle our children with impossible debt.
Update: LISD is holding two community meetings: one tonight, February 28, at 6:15 at Vista Ridge High School, and one tomorrow, March 1, at 6:15 at Vandegrift High School.
Update: Leander ISD's 2010 tax rate is $1.4548. (Thanks Matt!)
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Education Spending: Texas vs. California
We Texans love to compare ourselves with California; we have created more private sector jobs, have a lower tax burden and lower unemployment rate, and folks are leaving the formerly 'Golden' State in droves to seek Lone Star prosperity. Without a doubt, there is much to cheer. There is one area, however, where indeed Texas is bigger, but it is nothing to celebrate.
Both states love to tout their per pupil spending, and on the surface Texas looks pretty good at $6,746 to California's $7,511. As I've pointed out previously, these per pupil statistics do not include the cost of pensions, debt service, or building/construction costs, and are seriously deceptive. When all expenditures are included Texas per pupil spending rises to $11,024, and California's to $11,800.
Not too bad, right?
Unfortunately, a comparison of certain other aspects of education spending in the two states paints a whole new picture. As it turns out Texas has more public school employees than any state in the nation. California has 1.6 million more students than Texas, but has 1,225 fewer schools, and a jaw-dropping 52,090 fewer total education personnel. While we would hope that most of our public school employees would consist of those folks who actually teach, only 51% of Texas public education employees are teachers.
In the face of potential budget cuts, Texas education bureaucrats are demanding more spending rather than cuts. However, as Governor Perry pointed out in his State of the State address last week, State spending on education has increased 82% over the last decade. Even more astounding is the fact that total Texas public school expenditures have increased 335% since 1987. While we would hope that such vast increases in spending would improve student performance, an examination of the NAEP (National Assessment for Educational Progress) results reveal that Texas student test scores have remained stagnant or have actually decreased during this period.
Many Texas school districts are claiming they will have to close schools due to budget cuts, and yes, some probably will. However, many of these districts, and the state education industry as a whole, have not applied their respective budgets appropriately. Cutting amounts of state spending on education will force closer examination of how those 'education' dollars are spent. In so doing, we need to remember that our public education system does not exist to provide jobs and pensions for all comers, but was established to provide educational opportunities to all children. Texas has done a great job of applying small but smart government standards to other areas, and this has led to our economic strength. Now it's time to get serious about education spending too.
Both states love to tout their per pupil spending, and on the surface Texas looks pretty good at $6,746 to California's $7,511. As I've pointed out previously, these per pupil statistics do not include the cost of pensions, debt service, or building/construction costs, and are seriously deceptive. When all expenditures are included Texas per pupil spending rises to $11,024, and California's to $11,800.
Not too bad, right?
Unfortunately, a comparison of certain other aspects of education spending in the two states paints a whole new picture. As it turns out Texas has more public school employees than any state in the nation. California has 1.6 million more students than Texas, but has 1,225 fewer schools, and a jaw-dropping 52,090 fewer total education personnel. While we would hope that most of our public school employees would consist of those folks who actually teach, only 51% of Texas public education employees are teachers.
In the face of potential budget cuts, Texas education bureaucrats are demanding more spending rather than cuts. However, as Governor Perry pointed out in his State of the State address last week, State spending on education has increased 82% over the last decade. Even more astounding is the fact that total Texas public school expenditures have increased 335% since 1987. While we would hope that such vast increases in spending would improve student performance, an examination of the NAEP (National Assessment for Educational Progress) results reveal that Texas student test scores have remained stagnant or have actually decreased during this period.
Many Texas school districts are claiming they will have to close schools due to budget cuts, and yes, some probably will. However, many of these districts, and the state education industry as a whole, have not applied their respective budgets appropriately. Cutting amounts of state spending on education will force closer examination of how those 'education' dollars are spent. In so doing, we need to remember that our public education system does not exist to provide jobs and pensions for all comers, but was established to provide educational opportunities to all children. Texas has done a great job of applying small but smart government standards to other areas, and this has led to our economic strength. Now it's time to get serious about education spending too.
Friday, February 11, 2011
RRISD 'Budget Reduction' Community Meeting Feb. 15
The Round Rock Independent School District will be holding a Budget Reduction community meeting on February 15, 6:30 pm, at the Round Rock High School cafeteria. (map)
The amount of expected cuts in the State's contribution to the ISD range rather widely; anywhere from $17 million on up, with Superintendent Jesus Chavez claiming it could be $73 million. RRISD will have to enact cuts to their $336 million budget.
Over the past few weeks we've learned:
-The ISD has $198 million in its own rainy day fund.
-The ISD has an additional $92 million in the debt reserve fund.
-Total district expenditures per student is $11,420. (TEA AEIS Reports)
-RRISD is heavy on administration and administrator salaries:
Of the 5,423 Employees:
-179 are administrative staff members
-555 are 'paraprofessional' staff members
-1,200 are 'auxiliary' staff members
-53.8% of the total staff are teachers
-The average salary at Central Administration is $88,794.
-The Superintendent's salary is $252, 875 (plus generous benefits, although reportedly the superintendent is repaying the illegal bonus he received in 2010 ).
-There are 4 Assistant/Associate/Deputy Superintendents, adding $548,338 to the budget.
While it is never pleasant to cut budgets, this is a very good opportunity for parents and taxpayers to closely examine the way the district is spending education dollars, and make suggestions for change. The non-profit, non-partisan Texas Public Policy Foundation has some in-depth analysis and suggestions here.
Surely it is possible to educate children for less than $11,420 each.
The amount of expected cuts in the State's contribution to the ISD range rather widely; anywhere from $17 million on up, with Superintendent Jesus Chavez claiming it could be $73 million. RRISD will have to enact cuts to their $336 million budget.
Over the past few weeks we've learned:
-The ISD has $198 million in its own rainy day fund.
-The ISD has an additional $92 million in the debt reserve fund.
-Total district expenditures per student is $11,420. (TEA AEIS Reports)
-RRISD is heavy on administration and administrator salaries:
Of the 5,423 Employees:
-179 are administrative staff members
-555 are 'paraprofessional' staff members
-1,200 are 'auxiliary' staff members
-53.8% of the total staff are teachers
-The average salary at Central Administration is $88,794.
-The Superintendent's salary is $252, 875 (plus generous benefits, although reportedly the superintendent is repaying the illegal bonus he received in 2010 ).
-There are 4 Assistant/Associate/Deputy Superintendents, adding $548,338 to the budget.
While it is never pleasant to cut budgets, this is a very good opportunity for parents and taxpayers to closely examine the way the district is spending education dollars, and make suggestions for change. The non-profit, non-partisan Texas Public Policy Foundation has some in-depth analysis and suggestions here.
Surely it is possible to educate children for less than $11,420 each.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Governor Perry: No Sacred Cows
In today's State of the State Address, Governor Rick Perry told Texans “The state of the State is strong.” Perry noted that Texas added more jobs in 2010 than any other state, has six of the nation's 20 strongest metro areas, and that sales tax revenues have grown for 10 consecutive months. However, he pointed out that while our unemployment rate at 7.9% is lower than the national average, there are still many Texas families who need jobs, and we need to take steps to maintain our competitive edge.
Among the Governor's proposals were calls to continue to remove “senseless obstacles to economic growth,” and to maintain a predictable regulatory environment. In reference to recent disputes with President Obama and the EPA, Perry pointed out that under Texas' Flexible Permitting Program, the state reduced ozone levels by 27% and Nox levels by 53%, and still created more private sector jobs than any other large state in the nation.
One especially controversial area Governor Perry addressed, is that of the State's $9 million 'rainy day fund'. While there are many voices calling for using those funds to offset revenue shortfalls, the Governor says that using the account to pay for “recurring expenses” is a bad idea. “That approach would not only postpone tough, necessary decisions, but also leave us ill-equipped to handle bigger emergencies in the future.” I think I am inclined to agree with the Texas Senate that some rainy day funds should be used to pay for the deficit in the current biennium, but the 2012-13 budget should not rely on rainy day funds in any way.
Lefty pundits on the Twitter feed immediately began referring to potential school closings as a qualified emergency, but I think they have missed the point. Keeping a school open is a recurring expense, and it would be better for the state AND the school districts to re-work budgets with more efficient spending. While our school districts are bragging about low per-pupil operating expenditures, the truth is that Texas actually spends over $11,000 per student on 'education.' Furthermore, there is nearly one non-teaching staff member for every teaching staff member across the state. I'm sure the left-of-center crowd will scream (or moo?) about layoffs, but the purpose of our education system should be to educate children, not to provide more jobs.
Along those lines, Perry also called out Congressman Lloyd Doggett for his infamous Doggett Amendment, an attachment to last year's so-called 'Education Jobs Bill' that withholds from Texas $830 million in federal education funding unless the Governor somehow manages to circumvent the state constitution and the legislature to fund education at unsustainable levels. The truth is that the state has increase education funding by 82% over the last decade, but districts continue to outspend revenue with dangerous levels of borrowing.
As Governor Perry stated, "there should be no sacred cows in this business." He has led the way by cutting his own portion of the state budget by $34.6 million, and is supporting consolidation of agencies at the state level. Funding education is, and will continue to be a priority for the state, however, a blank check to anything labeled 'education spending' is neither sustainable nor desirable. Bureaucrats in education must also tighten the belt and make sure resources are spent wisely and appropriately.
Among the Governor's proposals were calls to continue to remove “senseless obstacles to economic growth,” and to maintain a predictable regulatory environment. In reference to recent disputes with President Obama and the EPA, Perry pointed out that under Texas' Flexible Permitting Program, the state reduced ozone levels by 27% and Nox levels by 53%, and still created more private sector jobs than any other large state in the nation.
One especially controversial area Governor Perry addressed, is that of the State's $9 million 'rainy day fund'. While there are many voices calling for using those funds to offset revenue shortfalls, the Governor says that using the account to pay for “recurring expenses” is a bad idea. “That approach would not only postpone tough, necessary decisions, but also leave us ill-equipped to handle bigger emergencies in the future.” I think I am inclined to agree with the Texas Senate that some rainy day funds should be used to pay for the deficit in the current biennium, but the 2012-13 budget should not rely on rainy day funds in any way.
Lefty pundits on the Twitter feed immediately began referring to potential school closings as a qualified emergency, but I think they have missed the point. Keeping a school open is a recurring expense, and it would be better for the state AND the school districts to re-work budgets with more efficient spending. While our school districts are bragging about low per-pupil operating expenditures, the truth is that Texas actually spends over $11,000 per student on 'education.' Furthermore, there is nearly one non-teaching staff member for every teaching staff member across the state. I'm sure the left-of-center crowd will scream (or moo?) about layoffs, but the purpose of our education system should be to educate children, not to provide more jobs.
Along those lines, Perry also called out Congressman Lloyd Doggett for his infamous Doggett Amendment, an attachment to last year's so-called 'Education Jobs Bill' that withholds from Texas $830 million in federal education funding unless the Governor somehow manages to circumvent the state constitution and the legislature to fund education at unsustainable levels. The truth is that the state has increase education funding by 82% over the last decade, but districts continue to outspend revenue with dangerous levels of borrowing.
As Governor Perry stated, "there should be no sacred cows in this business." He has led the way by cutting his own portion of the state budget by $34.6 million, and is supporting consolidation of agencies at the state level. Funding education is, and will continue to be a priority for the state, however, a blank check to anything labeled 'education spending' is neither sustainable nor desirable. Bureaucrats in education must also tighten the belt and make sure resources are spent wisely and appropriately.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Some Inconvenient Truths About Per-Pupil Expenditures At Round Rock ISD
Many Texas School Districts are claiming they will have to lay off teachers and increase classroom-size in the face of budget cuts from the state. A closer scrutiny of some of these districts however, reveals that there are areas other than teaching staff that would be logical to cut. The Round Rock District has an astounding $200 million in its rainy day fund that would more than cover state cuts, and examination of district expenses reveal that there are many other opportunities for savings.
One area that seems especially prime is non-teaching staff salaries. According to policy analysts, growth in administrator and support staff salaries has far outpaced that for teachers. In the Round Rock district, first-year teacher salaries stand at about $42k, but average central administration salary is more than twice that: $88,794. Ten of those central administration employees make well over $120,000, but of course the most eye-popping salary goes to the Superintendent at $252,875.
In contrast with most RRISD employees, Superintendent Jesus Chavez has enjoyed annual raises for a total 23.5% in increases since his original hire contract in 2006. (This while private sector wages have been steadily decreasing, and unemployment has roared to 10%.) Teacher salaries, on the other hand have grown at a much slower rate with increases of 1-4% each year. Not only does Dr. Chavez enjoy a hefty annual salary, but also receives many other benefits, including bonus pay of up to $10,000 a year, an annual contribution of $10,000 to his retirement account, and a $5,800 expense account for which he does not have to submit receipts. (Thanks to former ISD Board President Diana Maldonado.)
Taxpayers also pay for Superintendent Chavez' membership in various professional 'associations.' One of those 'associations' is the Texas Association of School Administrators, where Chavez is a member of the Legislative Committee. The TASA legislative priorities are very much in line with left-of-center education policies in demanding more funding with little or no reform. For example, TASA is asking the State to build automatic increases into the education budget, to give districts the power to raise property taxes without voter approval, and opposes caps on the amount of tax that can be levied on property. Furthermore, the group opposes any financial assistance for families who cannot use their assigned public school, since that might take funds away from the district. (In other words, if parents cannot afford to seek alternatives for special needs education, too bad.)
While the Round Rock Independent School District likes to advertise that their operating expenditures per student is only $7,505, if we include all costs for the district, (such as debt service, teacher pensions, and building and remodeling,) the total expenditure per student is $11,196. (State average is $11,024). Furthermore, when we calculate per classroom spending (multiplying per pupil spending by average classroom size) claims that Texas schools are spending 65% on classroom instruction crumble. (for example, teacher salaries are only 18-20% of classroom spending.)
RRISD receives 17% of its revenue from the state, and is properly preparing for cuts. However, claiming that the only way to survive is to eliminate teaching positions is disingenuous at best, and there are many non-teaching expenses that may be cut. Perhaps a good starting point for RRISD would be to stop funding membership in left-leaning 'associations,' cut the superintendent's salary back to the rate on his original contract, and cut all administrator salaries by 20%. I realize this would pose quite a hardship on poor Dr. Chavez, but we in the private sector have been making those adjustments for several years now, and I assure him, it can be done. After all, no state governor in the U.S. makes anywhere near Dr. Chavez' salary, and they all seem to do just fine.
The districts' response to such suggestions have been a snippy statement that it wouldn't be enough to make up the cuts. No, but it is a start, and as the adage goes, you eat an elephant 'one bite at a time.'
One area that seems especially prime is non-teaching staff salaries. According to policy analysts, growth in administrator and support staff salaries has far outpaced that for teachers. In the Round Rock district, first-year teacher salaries stand at about $42k, but average central administration salary is more than twice that: $88,794. Ten of those central administration employees make well over $120,000, but of course the most eye-popping salary goes to the Superintendent at $252,875.
In contrast with most RRISD employees, Superintendent Jesus Chavez has enjoyed annual raises for a total 23.5% in increases since his original hire contract in 2006. (This while private sector wages have been steadily decreasing, and unemployment has roared to 10%.) Teacher salaries, on the other hand have grown at a much slower rate with increases of 1-4% each year. Not only does Dr. Chavez enjoy a hefty annual salary, but also receives many other benefits, including bonus pay of up to $10,000 a year, an annual contribution of $10,000 to his retirement account, and a $5,800 expense account for which he does not have to submit receipts. (Thanks to former ISD Board President Diana Maldonado.)
Taxpayers also pay for Superintendent Chavez' membership in various professional 'associations.' One of those 'associations' is the Texas Association of School Administrators, where Chavez is a member of the Legislative Committee. The TASA legislative priorities are very much in line with left-of-center education policies in demanding more funding with little or no reform. For example, TASA is asking the State to build automatic increases into the education budget, to give districts the power to raise property taxes without voter approval, and opposes caps on the amount of tax that can be levied on property. Furthermore, the group opposes any financial assistance for families who cannot use their assigned public school, since that might take funds away from the district. (In other words, if parents cannot afford to seek alternatives for special needs education, too bad.)
While the Round Rock Independent School District likes to advertise that their operating expenditures per student is only $7,505, if we include all costs for the district, (such as debt service, teacher pensions, and building and remodeling,) the total expenditure per student is $11,196. (State average is $11,024). Furthermore, when we calculate per classroom spending (multiplying per pupil spending by average classroom size) claims that Texas schools are spending 65% on classroom instruction crumble. (for example, teacher salaries are only 18-20% of classroom spending.)
RRISD receives 17% of its revenue from the state, and is properly preparing for cuts. However, claiming that the only way to survive is to eliminate teaching positions is disingenuous at best, and there are many non-teaching expenses that may be cut. Perhaps a good starting point for RRISD would be to stop funding membership in left-leaning 'associations,' cut the superintendent's salary back to the rate on his original contract, and cut all administrator salaries by 20%. I realize this would pose quite a hardship on poor Dr. Chavez, but we in the private sector have been making those adjustments for several years now, and I assure him, it can be done. After all, no state governor in the U.S. makes anywhere near Dr. Chavez' salary, and they all seem to do just fine.
The districts' response to such suggestions have been a snippy statement that it wouldn't be enough to make up the cuts. No, but it is a start, and as the adage goes, you eat an elephant 'one bite at a time.'
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
RRISD Needs a Coming to Jesus Moment
While Texas remains on top as the strongest economy nationwide, the state is feeling the effects of the recession. The Comptroller's forecast indicates tax revenue will drop significantly in the next biennium, and most Republican state lawmakers are planning budget cuts rather than tax increases, saying there are "no sacred cows."
Well, the cattle are lowing. Some of the loudest howls of protest are coming from the public education sector, our own Round Rock ISD superintendent Jesus Chavez among them. Chavez is claiming that the cuts to the district may total as much as $73 million, and the only thing they can possibly do is lay off teachers.
Right.
Okay, first of all, no-one is really sure where Jesus Chavez is getting this $73 million figure; even if the 'starting point' budget proposal unveiled last week became the final budget, (it won't) the cut to RRISD would be approximately $46 million. Now, to be sure, that is a lot of money. However, in a KVUE interview last night, Jesus said RRISD has its own rainy day fund of $200 million.
What?
So, Jesus Chavez claims that if the State cuts his budget he'll have to lay off teachers, but he has $200 MILLION in a RAINY DAY FUND? I don't know what kind of new math they're teaching in Round Rock Schools, but it looks to me like $200 MILLION is about $154 MILLION MORE THAN $46 MILLION.
It is very troubling that the ISD and Dr. Chavez are demanding use of the State's Rainy Day Fund, and claiming that cuts will force them to lay-off teachers, (because, apparently, there is not one ounce of waste anywhere else in the ISD budget). Furthermore, Dr. Chavez and Board of Trustee Member Diane Cox, (running for re-election in 2011) are among those lobbying the legislature for the right to raise property taxes without voter approval. All the while, they are sitting on $200 million.
This leads us to ask, what kind of game are these folks playing? Isn't it time that they stop using scare tactics and started taking the economic recession seriously? How about the district does what most American families are having to do, cut any and all waste out of the budget at every level. And for goodness' sake, tap into that rainy day fund. It's raining.
Well, the cattle are lowing. Some of the loudest howls of protest are coming from the public education sector, our own Round Rock ISD superintendent Jesus Chavez among them. Chavez is claiming that the cuts to the district may total as much as $73 million, and the only thing they can possibly do is lay off teachers.
Right.
Okay, first of all, no-one is really sure where Jesus Chavez is getting this $73 million figure; even if the 'starting point' budget proposal unveiled last week became the final budget, (it won't) the cut to RRISD would be approximately $46 million. Now, to be sure, that is a lot of money. However, in a KVUE interview last night, Jesus said RRISD has its own rainy day fund of $200 million.
What?
So, Jesus Chavez claims that if the State cuts his budget he'll have to lay off teachers, but he has $200 MILLION in a RAINY DAY FUND? I don't know what kind of new math they're teaching in Round Rock Schools, but it looks to me like $200 MILLION is about $154 MILLION MORE THAN $46 MILLION.
It is very troubling that the ISD and Dr. Chavez are demanding use of the State's Rainy Day Fund, and claiming that cuts will force them to lay-off teachers, (because, apparently, there is not one ounce of waste anywhere else in the ISD budget). Furthermore, Dr. Chavez and Board of Trustee Member Diane Cox, (running for re-election in 2011) are among those lobbying the legislature for the right to raise property taxes without voter approval. All the while, they are sitting on $200 million.
This leads us to ask, what kind of game are these folks playing? Isn't it time that they stop using scare tactics and started taking the economic recession seriously? How about the district does what most American families are having to do, cut any and all waste out of the budget at every level. And for goodness' sake, tap into that rainy day fund. It's raining.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Republicans Get Serious
Among the Texas Public Policy Foundation's legislative agenda items for this year is a call to "Eliminate programs and agencies that are outside the Constitutional vision of limited government." The TPPF statement is reflective of the mood of American voters who are demanding cuts to government spending and reduction of the national debt. Happily, it seems elected Republicans are heeding the call and taking action accordingly, and some of the programs they want to cut aren't just outside of the Constitutional vision, they're just plain crazy.
At the Federal level, House Republicans are now taking up the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which calls for $2.5 trillion in spending cuts over ten years. In addition to holding non-security spending to 2008 levels in 2011 and to 2006 levels thereafter, the proposal includes over 100 other cuts, many to programs that fall outside the role of limited government.
Take a look at some of the cuts: Cutting PBS (government television) would save $445 million annually, and elimination of the Amtrak subsidies would save a whopping $1.565 billion annually. Other proposals include the elimination of "duplicative education programs" for a savings of $1.3 billion annually, and, get this, requiring collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees for a savings of $1 billion. (Self, don't us non-gubmit folks go to jail for tax evasion?)
No doubt the Liberal-Progressives will scream that these cuts will eliminate jobs, (yesterday State Rep. Donna Howard was already wailing about that on the state level), but these are government jobs that contribute little to the economy and often end up as employment entitlements that long outlive their original purpose.
Texas lawmakers are also taking a scalpel to spending, and state Republicans from the top down are promising to balance the budget without raising taxes. The first draft, released this week, starts off with $31.1 billion in cuts, and while the first draft is never fully adopted, it is a very good starting point for limiting government.
Now the question is, will local government entities do the same? Most of our federal and state lawmakers have gotten the message that voters want government to do what every American family has to do: cut spending in the face of decreased revenue. Local governments, county, city, MUDs and school districts should stop trying to squeeze more money out of the taxpayers, and start looking for their own ways to cut the budget. Voters are better informed than ever before, and you better believe they are watching.
At the Federal level, House Republicans are now taking up the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, which calls for $2.5 trillion in spending cuts over ten years. In addition to holding non-security spending to 2008 levels in 2011 and to 2006 levels thereafter, the proposal includes over 100 other cuts, many to programs that fall outside the role of limited government.
Take a look at some of the cuts: Cutting PBS (government television) would save $445 million annually, and elimination of the Amtrak subsidies would save a whopping $1.565 billion annually. Other proposals include the elimination of "duplicative education programs" for a savings of $1.3 billion annually, and, get this, requiring collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees for a savings of $1 billion. (Self, don't us non-gubmit folks go to jail for tax evasion?)
No doubt the Liberal-Progressives will scream that these cuts will eliminate jobs, (yesterday State Rep. Donna Howard was already wailing about that on the state level), but these are government jobs that contribute little to the economy and often end up as employment entitlements that long outlive their original purpose.
Texas lawmakers are also taking a scalpel to spending, and state Republicans from the top down are promising to balance the budget without raising taxes. The first draft, released this week, starts off with $31.1 billion in cuts, and while the first draft is never fully adopted, it is a very good starting point for limiting government.
Now the question is, will local government entities do the same? Most of our federal and state lawmakers have gotten the message that voters want government to do what every American family has to do: cut spending in the face of decreased revenue. Local governments, county, city, MUDs and school districts should stop trying to squeeze more money out of the taxpayers, and start looking for their own ways to cut the budget. Voters are better informed than ever before, and you better believe they are watching.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Regarding Diana Maldonado: Voters Know a Hawk from a Handsaw
"I am but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw."
-Hamlet, Act II, Scene II
On a recent campaign mailer, Representative Diana Maldonado included this 2008 quote from the Austin American Statesman: "Maldonado has a reputation as a budget hawk." While I hardly think I need to go over the credibility problems inherent in a liberal town's liberal newspaper praising a liberal candidate, those familiar with Maldonado's work on the Round Rock School Board were baffled by the 'budget hawk' statement at the time. Since then, her actions in the 81st legislative session have proved that, like most Democrats, Representative Maldonado prefers to fly fast and free with taxpayer dollars.
During Diana Maldonado's tenure on the Round Rock ISD Board, 2003-08, voters were appalled by the proposal of a whopping $350 million bond package in 2005, one the voters soundly defeated. Even so, by 2008 RRISD debt had risen to nearly $630 million, and yet the district still failed to allocate the required 65% of funds to classroom instruction, and had to go back to taxpayers for an additional $294 million that year. Granted, the district's student population had grown by about 30%, but revenues had grown by 75% during the same period. Furthermore, under then school board president Maldonado, the superintendent's contracted salary inexplicably rose by $38,480 giving him an annual salary of $243,080.00- significantly higher compensation than any governor of any state in the country. Not sure where the 'budget hawk' was in that mess.
Maldonado's disregard for budgetary restraint continued in the Texas House, and her first legislative proposal, H.B. 282, called for state employees to have a tax-payer funded paid holiday on Election Days. Never mind that Texas enjoys anywhere from 5 to 14 days of early voting for any election. Employers with even the most rudimentary grasp of cost-benefit analysis understand that paid holidays add to the overall budget. In order for every state employee to have 2 more paid holidays each year, Texas would have to add an estimated $54 million to the budget. Happily, that rotten egg never made it out of committee.
On other votes regarding government spending and business, Maldonado continued to show a lack of fiscal restraint, and earned a 28% fiscal responsibility rating from Texans For Fiscal Responsibility/Empower Texans. The average score was 56.7%, leaving Maldonado far below the majority of her peers in the House.
On the 2010 campaign trail, Maldonado seems confused about the projected budget shortfall, and continuously refers to a multi-billion dollar deficit. What Representative Maldonado doesn't seem to understand is that we are not talking about a current deficit, but a reduction in the estimated amount of tax revenue the state will collect next year, based on current trends. In the 2011 session, Texas legislators will need to create a new budget in accordance with these projected revenues. It is disturbing that Diana Maldonado's response to the projected shortfall is to talk about 'new revenue streams' and ending 'exemptions.' Translation of government-speak for the voter: 'new revenue streams' = new taxes, and apparently the Democrat mantra this year is to call for a state income tax.
In contrast, Republican candidate Larry Gonzales is campaigning on a fiscally conservative platform and promises spending cuts. Last Saturday in front of some 40 volunteers assembled to canvass the district, he signed a Taxpayer Protection Pledge created by Empower Texans. In his comments, Gonzales reiterated his commitment to doing "what every American family has to do" in cutting spending.
With Americans already reeling under the weight of Obamanomics, the last thing the economy needs is more and/or higher taxes, which will only stifle growth. What we really need are elected officials willing to cut government spending and allow people to use more of their own earnings as they see fit. Unlike some Texas House members, I think the voters are smart enough to tell the difference between a failed 'hawk' and a candidate ready to apply a scalpel, if not a handsaw, to the budget.
-Hamlet, Act II, Scene II
On a recent campaign mailer, Representative Diana Maldonado included this 2008 quote from the Austin American Statesman: "Maldonado has a reputation as a budget hawk." While I hardly think I need to go over the credibility problems inherent in a liberal town's liberal newspaper praising a liberal candidate, those familiar with Maldonado's work on the Round Rock School Board were baffled by the 'budget hawk' statement at the time. Since then, her actions in the 81st legislative session have proved that, like most Democrats, Representative Maldonado prefers to fly fast and free with taxpayer dollars.
During Diana Maldonado's tenure on the Round Rock ISD Board, 2003-08, voters were appalled by the proposal of a whopping $350 million bond package in 2005, one the voters soundly defeated. Even so, by 2008 RRISD debt had risen to nearly $630 million, and yet the district still failed to allocate the required 65% of funds to classroom instruction, and had to go back to taxpayers for an additional $294 million that year. Granted, the district's student population had grown by about 30%, but revenues had grown by 75% during the same period. Furthermore, under then school board president Maldonado, the superintendent's contracted salary inexplicably rose by $38,480 giving him an annual salary of $243,080.00- significantly higher compensation than any governor of any state in the country. Not sure where the 'budget hawk' was in that mess.
Maldonado's disregard for budgetary restraint continued in the Texas House, and her first legislative proposal, H.B. 282, called for state employees to have a tax-payer funded paid holiday on Election Days. Never mind that Texas enjoys anywhere from 5 to 14 days of early voting for any election. Employers with even the most rudimentary grasp of cost-benefit analysis understand that paid holidays add to the overall budget. In order for every state employee to have 2 more paid holidays each year, Texas would have to add an estimated $54 million to the budget. Happily, that rotten egg never made it out of committee.
On other votes regarding government spending and business, Maldonado continued to show a lack of fiscal restraint, and earned a 28% fiscal responsibility rating from Texans For Fiscal Responsibility/Empower Texans. The average score was 56.7%, leaving Maldonado far below the majority of her peers in the House.
On the 2010 campaign trail, Maldonado seems confused about the projected budget shortfall, and continuously refers to a multi-billion dollar deficit. What Representative Maldonado doesn't seem to understand is that we are not talking about a current deficit, but a reduction in the estimated amount of tax revenue the state will collect next year, based on current trends. In the 2011 session, Texas legislators will need to create a new budget in accordance with these projected revenues. It is disturbing that Diana Maldonado's response to the projected shortfall is to talk about 'new revenue streams' and ending 'exemptions.' Translation of government-speak for the voter: 'new revenue streams' = new taxes, and apparently the Democrat mantra this year is to call for a state income tax.
In contrast, Republican candidate Larry Gonzales is campaigning on a fiscally conservative platform and promises spending cuts. Last Saturday in front of some 40 volunteers assembled to canvass the district, he signed a Taxpayer Protection Pledge created by Empower Texans. In his comments, Gonzales reiterated his commitment to doing "what every American family has to do" in cutting spending.
With Americans already reeling under the weight of Obamanomics, the last thing the economy needs is more and/or higher taxes, which will only stifle growth. What we really need are elected officials willing to cut government spending and allow people to use more of their own earnings as they see fit. Unlike some Texas House members, I think the voters are smart enough to tell the difference between a failed 'hawk' and a candidate ready to apply a scalpel, if not a handsaw, to the budget.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)