Points to Ponder
The money that has been paid out to
restructure the education system has gone into establishing the new system, not
into educating children. Yet the system being established
has never been proven to be anything but a failure in producing innovative,
creative, intelligent children capable of reaching for the star or stars of
their choice.
Six year growth rates for the district:
|
Year |
Total Budget |
FTE Pupils |
Cost/FTE |
FTE Personnel |
M & O Levy |
|
1992/93 |
$5,854,911 |
1,273.36 |
$4,598 |
99.955 |
560,633 |
|
1998/99 |
$8,886,810 |
1,500.401 |
$5,923 |
143.2681 |
1,062,887 |
|
Increase |
$3,031,899 |
227.04 |
$1,325 |
43.313 |
502,254 |
|
% Increase |
52% |
18% |
29% |
43% |
90% |
1Figures from the 1999/2000 F-195 Budget – Projected. As the budget figures
for the 1999/2000 year budget were entered in July after students were
dismissed for the 98/99 school year, these figures are probably pretty close to
actual.
|
With only a 18% increase in the
number of students served by the district, the budget has risen 52%, the cost
to educate one child has risen 29%, the number of personnel by 43%, and the
amount the district has asked taxpayers to fund, over and above what the
state funds (M & O Levy), by 90%.
Were the goal to educate children, striving to achieve maximum
efficiency for the money spent, these figures would be much more closely
aligned. This, however, is the
norm under education reform, where the bureaucracy becomes top-heavy as the
focus (or goal) is shifted from educating children to establishing,
maintaining and sustaining "the system." |
Source: F-196 Budget – Actual;
F-195 Budget – Projected
Last Updated: 3/2000
╪