We are not going to skimp on
education! Most citizens agree with that
idea. So a long time ago, Maryland
passed a law that requires public school districts to never reduce the basic
minimum spending for education. The law
was passed for a couple of reasons.
First of all it was the era
of a good bit of both federal and State money being added to local
budgets. State legislators and the
general public did not want this additional money to supplant the money that
was being spent by the local system.
They wanted this new money to be indeed NEW money and not replace what
was already being spent.
Another reason for the law
was that there are good times and bad times in the economy. The rule was supposed to make sure that even
in bad times the kids would get the money to which they were entitled.
Generally people thought this
was a very enlightened idea and a wonderful way to protect school funding.
But as with all good deeds
there were unintended consequences.
Counties might want to increase spending for schools in times when
revenues were high. However, the catch
is once expenditures are increased, those expenditures re-set the basic
minimum. So then school systems cannot
go below these new amounts.
Critics say that the effects
of the basic minimum limits the amount of new money school districts want to
put into education since once raised they can’t go back.
Supporters say that inflation
eats up those increases and even though there is more money in the budget, the
purchasing power of the new money is about the same as the former lesser
amounts. Therefore, it is reasonable to
set the new basic minimum commensurate with the increases in spending.
Every once in a while, a
school district will ask for a bye on a new expenditure. For example, during the recession, a school
district reduced its contribution to health care for the staff. Now that district wants to put some of that
money back. It has requested that the
State Board of Education not count that money towards a new basic minimum
expenditure. At the present time the
Board has not responded because it does not want to open a floodgate of more
exception requests.
Some districts have had no
issue whatever with the basic minimums because the new teacher contract eats
any deficits.
Still the argument
rages. Do required basic minimums act to
deter innovation? A school system spends
money to innovate; the innovation fails, but the system is stuck with still
spending that money on something else to sustain the new basic minimum.
Supporters of the law say it
sustains local spending when state and federal grants go away. Other public money leaving a lower local
contribution without the safeguard would supplant local spending. If the other money does go away, the local
money remains intact.
Basic minimum spending- an
enlightened idea to assure safeguards for children or another government rule
that stifles innovation.
You decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment