Kansas Democrats Make School Funding Major Issue
- Sun 05:45 PM 10/14/2012
Kansas Democrats Have Made Education Funding Major Issue
Kansas Democrats have made funding for public schools a major issue in legislative races, highlighting key differences between them and Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.
Democrats are criticizing Brownback and his conservative allies over massive income tax cuts enacted this year, suggesting they'll create big budget problems. They contend the tax cuts will force the state to dramatically reduce aid to public schools.
Brownback sought to undercut the criticism in a news conference, arguing the tax cuts will spur economic growth that will allow the state to boost school funding.
The back-and-forth showed how Democrats see increased spending on public schools as a much higher priority than tax cuts, while Brownback and his allies place the biggest premium on reducing income taxes to stimulate the economy.
Comments must stay on topic and be respectful. Comments that are personal attacks, make unfounded accusations, or are for the purpose of "trolling" or inciting others will be removed. Offending users will have their profile suspended.
Post a comment Log in or Register to comment
troy
Sunday 14 October 2012 20:12 Report this comment
Time for the Teachers Unions to face reality. $70,000 a year and going on strike because your raise wasn't enough......the party is over. Story not long ago was about schools failing to spend government money appropriately, something like 70-80% failed to meet the requirements. It's time to be fiscally responsible, shut up and teach, be glad you have a job, enjoy your summers off, or go stand in line with the aircraft workers at the unemployment office.
Aurora
Sunday 14 October 2012 23:33 Report this comment
@ troy, teachers in Kansas does not earn $70,000 a year. My mom is a teacher and she only earns about $30,000 a year and that is before taxes and that is far below the average wage of teachers in other states. Also $30,000 is very low value for bachelor degree in education and my mom's raise is frozen for several years and because of inflation, her salary actually is lowering every year and it is getting harder to pay off the student loan debt and feed the family.
ShadowCipher
Monday 15 October 2012 00:09 Report this comment
Aurora is right. The pay is much closer to $30,000 a year. Not a bad living, but certainly not a high income job. An issue I've noticed lately is the volume of things teachers must buy for themselves. I am not talking about decor, but rather day to day items like paper, markers, etc. This can cut into their income by an alarming degree. --- Anyway, I am curious to see if I can find any studies that show any clear winner between the Republican's stance, and the Democrats. My gut is Democrats.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 00:11 Report this comment
Wife makes $33,000 before taxes as a third year teacher. Also, that "failing to spend government money appropriately" is because "65% has to go to "aid in classroom instruction." That means, for whatever reason schools cannot put 65% into class room instruction and still manage to run a school. That 65% doesn't include special education jobs like mine. Which honestly is the BIGGEST chunk of educational spending and needs a big revamp. You're an idiot and your complaints are all based off outrageous numbers. You act like teachers are out there thinking "OH MAN GONNA BECOME A MILLIONAIRE TEACHING!" No, they do it because they love what they do, unfortunately regulations on how and what they must teach essentially add to more and more hours outside of school. Meetings they must attend and continued education they must receive, all of these things require more and more work.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 00:13 Report this comment
Sure! Maybe 30 years ago when teachers went home and spent maybe 1 hour a night planning they made fair wages. Now however, my wife has to go home after work and spend 3-4 hours planning, and explaining those plans and how those plans meet the government criteria for teaching. So while you go home from McDonalds and manage to forget about flipping burgers, my wife is up til 11pm some nights trying to think of a way to engage a kid who doesn't care whether he graduates or not. Then when he doesn't care, it's HER fault.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 00:18 Report this comment
The thing is, if they wanted spending cuts across the board TEACHERS could come up with them. Teachers could redesign education, they could redesign completely how a school is run. However, those who decide don't understand education, instead they just want to toss more and more expectations and goals out there without either restructuring, or adding funding. You want to know how to cut the educational budget in this country? Stop paying $30,000 per year+ to educate one special education student. If the kid obviously cannot learn to count money, tell time, or do basic math, stop paying people like me to try and teach him Algebra. Instead, focus on the very very basics with that student and when he's done send him on his way. It's ridiculous how much we spend in time and money to force essentially unneeded education on children who cannot learn the small skill set needed to work in a factory, or any menial job.
GETALIFE674
Monday 15 October 2012 08:30 Report this comment
Aurora and damistac evidently those relatives have not been teachers very long. While 70k is a wrong number to use most teachers that have been teaching some time are in the $40k t0 $50K bracket. Naturally not the kind of money say a superintendent makes or a principle. There are superintendents out there in small districts say with 300 to 500 children pulling down some $80k to $100K a year. While in bigger districts alot more than that. Superintendents should be paid as to the size of the district they work in. Another problem is that districts like Salina employ people that never come in contact with most students outrageous salaries just to have around. Schools used to operate with a superintendent, principles, vice principles, counselors, teachers, office staff, janitor staff and a school nurse. Not anymore as is the case in Salina.
GETALIFE674
Monday 15 October 2012 08:38 Report this comment
Now they have psychologists and assistants, language interperators, in house plumbers and electicians and the list goes on and on. Just about everyone has assistants and alot of these people get paid more than the teacher teaching the students. Take a look at what positions the salina school system is paying its listed on the computer and ask yourself why. Then they spend more money to build that huge maintance building for what? Salina pays an outside company to bus students so they have no fleet of bus's to worry about. This all goes back to the people elected to serve on the school boards as they approve all of the positions and buildings within the system. But so much money is being paid elsewhere instead of where it should be that in educating our children.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 15:56 Report this comment
I did say in my post that my wife was only three years in, however the rate at which teachers in her district get raises is 2% per year. The national average is 2.9% in 2012, and 3% in previous years. That being said, teachers get 1% less in terms of a raise each year than most other professions, AND they're required to spend money each year furthering their education. I agree though wholeheartedly, and the problem is the same as what I expressed when discussing the KDOT issue. When any department of the state government (at least in Kansas) has more money one year than they need their budget gets cut the next year. This leads to a constantly fluctuation in funding except agencies are "wise" to this and spend all or as much of the money as possible each year.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 16:01 Report this comment
If we were able to revamp how that policy worked and just set budgets and let money roll into some kind of savings account for that department then schools wouldn't need to dump a ton of money on things like a new maintenance building one year, and beg for funding the next. Additionally, like you mentioned there are MANY MANY areas where it seems like excess, and the problem with that is the politicians set guidelines and they don't understand how it effects or modifies budgets. I'm not sure whose fault this is politically speaking and frankly I don't care.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 16:02 Report this comment
It needs to stop, the government needs to stop telling schools that they need to somehow teach a child who cannot read/write due to a learning disability to churn out Shakespeare. They need to understand that a child who spends 10 years learning to do basic math has no business being pushed to learn Biology. Yes, it's a great concept to have a basic idea of it, however they can gain that basic knowledge earlier in life. We need to focus on job skills for those "special needs" individuals who are beyond the typical level of help. I say this knowing that my position would more than likely be removed or consolidated into another position, however I'm looking at what's best from a financial stand point, AND what's best for the kids I work with.
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 20:07 Report this comment
The government does need a small hand in things. Otherwise the budget would be 95% football, 3% faculty lounge and 2% classroom. We could start by stripping the power the unions have. Make sports what they used to be, fun and learning teamwork. The emphasis should be academics. No further discussion is needed.
Iamgonnagetyou
Monday 15 October 2012 20:07 Report this comment
To begin with special needs kids need to be in their own setting. Putting special needs kids in with regular students just does not work. I do agree that each of these kids have different levels of learning. I also believe the parents of special needs children should pick up part of the expense to work with their children.
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 21:04 Report this comment
How has the conversation found it's way to special needs kids? The root of the problem is the sky high teachers salaries, unions, school boards inability to follow the rules with the budgets, sports programs, etc. Again, the focus should be academics.......period!
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 21:09 Report this comment
Try this. You go to the hospital for a check up or treatment. But the machine they use to treat you is broken. The budget is kind of out of whack because the head of the hospital board spent the money on football gear and a new volleyball net. The doctors are also on strike because the union is upset with a ridiculous pay raise of only 1%. Don't worry though, the doctors will be taking on the local dentists friday night and should be quite a game. How's that pain in your knee doing?
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 21:11 Report this comment
Can you see through the humor? The purpose of the hospital is for medical care. Nothing else. What should the purpose of a school be?
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 21:23 Report this comment
Just got this off of Fox News. I wonder how much Fraud, Waste and Abuse is in our schools. The report spotlights widespread abuse of the food stamp system - including an exotic dancer who earned more than $85,000 a year in tips, but also collected nearly $1,000 a month in food stamps while spending $9,000 during that time period on "cosmetic enhancements." - Nearly $700,000 from the National Science Foundation to a New York-based theater company so it could develop a musical about climate change and biodiversity. "The Great Immensity" opened in Kansas City this year. Along with the songs one reviewer described as sounding like "a Wikipedia entry set to music," the audience was also able to experience "flying monkey poop."
lindag
Monday 15 October 2012 21:34 Report this comment
Troy needs his meds. What does ANY of that have to do with education. My spouse makes around $42K after teaching for 20 years plus spending $12,000 on a Master's Degree to continue getting raises. Has your employer ever forced you to do that Troy? On top of that, when you average out the salary, my spouse brings home a little less that $2 per hour per pupil. You can't hire a baby sitter for that! Why continue when ungrateful parents and even more ungrateful taxpayers think they know more about education than educators? Because of the kids, Troy. Because they love the kids. It's not about money and it sure as hell isn't about you, Troy. Get a life!
troy
Monday 15 October 2012 21:57 Report this comment
Former employers have required far more of me than you may ever comprehend. $2 per hour per pupil (30 kids in a class)......that's $60.00 an hour. Not to shabby. Damn good in fact. Very grateful as a parent. Very grateful. The point was there is fat to be trimmed, programs to be reworked, rules to be adhered to (budget). Want to impress me, dump the union and show up tomorrow to teach because you love it like you say you do. Do that and you will have my respect for life. I will go to bat for you any day of the week. You don't need Vinnie and his goons to look out for you. You should earn your raise and not have the union thugs rake the parents of the kids you love to teach so much over the coals.
BobBowser
Monday 15 October 2012 22:36 Report this comment
The truth about Kansas School finance can be read here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.10151223126829905&type=1
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 22:49 Report this comment
How did it turn to special education? Are you an idiot? Do you lack comprehension skills? Here's the basic math, a regular child costs us approximately $10,000 a year to educate, a special needs child costs us $30,000 a year to educate. "Special Needs" doesn't just mean severely handicapped. It means almost any child with any decent level of handicap. In the district I work in approximately 15% of students are "Special Needs". Which means for the 100 kids total (per grade level) we spend 850,000 a year on the regular kids, and 450,000 on the "special needs" children.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 22:59 Report this comment
Then, you have to consider that money doesn't go into "classroom instruction" costs unlike the 10,000 a year. Then you spread this out per grade level, grades K-12, and you've got a real problem. Not to mention many special needs kids are held back grade levels. So lets see where the REAL problem is, a school district like mine which has 6 administrators, and approximately 50 teachers, average teacher salary is $35,000. Then the average administrator salary is $76,000. So! 1,750,000 for teachers, and 456,000 for Administrators. The district has approximately 600 students. At a 15% special needs rate that means 90 of the students are costing us $20,000 more than they should. That's $1,800,000 that DOESN'T go to "Classroom Instruction" it goes to hiring counselors, and Para educators.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 23:04 Report this comment
That $1,800,000 every single year, for a small district is ridiculous, consider how much a city like Salina pays. Perhaps the best part is that the state of Kansas REQUIRES the special education be done by an outside company or cooperative. Which I know para educators make $8-10/hr, we pay those cooperatives roughly $20/hr. It's not the teachers or the teacher "Unions" I'm not sure what Union screwed you over man, but you really need to get it together.
DamiStac
Monday 15 October 2012 23:08 Report this comment
I also want to make one more comment quoting you, "Former employers have required far more of me than you may ever comprehend." Perhaps their requirements are why you're so bitter? Perhaps you should have chosen a different career path rather than taking it out on hard working individuals, assuming every single teacher out there is a mooch. You sit here and make these blatant attacks as though every single teacher sits at home at night and conspires on how to "rob the system". There are far more good teachers out there than bad, and quite frankly your method of "screwing" them is only going to lead to good teachers bailing and bad teachers saying, "Meh for $2,000 less a year I'd be glad to do less than I already am."
GETALIFE674
Monday 15 October 2012 23:55 Report this comment
Someone touched lightly on special needs kids and having the parents pay. I believe totally that any parent that has a special needs child should pay all fees above what a non special needs child is received. Further school districts should not be required especially small districts to have to provide special transportation. If the child needs to go to a special needs center then the parents should be responsible for transportation. Seems to me special needs children through no fault of there own but due to their parents lifestyle prior to their birth is presently a major strain on the system. According to some physicians alot of the issues that special needs child are the result of the parents drug usuage prior of during conceivement of the child. There are on going studies presently looking more into this issue. None the less any costs more than alotted for a non special needs child should be paid by the parents.
GETALIFE674
Tuesday 16 October 2012 00:11 Report this comment
Beyond special needs there is a ton of waste of tax payer monies by the schools and their school boards. Seems to me school boards seem to be good at spending monies. Take Salina for instance why do they need to have in house plumbers and electricians? Used to be janitorial staff took care of small problems but outside people were hired for major isssues. Consider that building Salina District is building and for what reason? If all this continues the schools will have in house doctors, dentist's and whatever else they can think of maybe someone who repairs cell phones. Remember Salina District allows cell phones now even in classes. This is ridiculious cell phones should not be allowed within the school doors and if they are they should be checked into the school only to be received at the end of the school day. Until school superintendents and school boards take more responsibility they will spend taxpayer money foolishly.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 07:18 Report this comment
GETALIFE, I disagree with your idea of making parents pay simply because many of the special needs kids I work with don't have bad parents. I don't think the parents should be punished, nor the child. I do however think the level of education that child receives should be based off of what the child is essentially capable of learning, and only "forced" to a degree. By that I mean, teach the child the fundamentals of life. Teach them to read/write at a basic level but don't expect them to be able to write recite Shakespeare without a book. Do not expect the child to understand Algebra, refocus the money we spend on things like that into helping kids who might just be a little behind, or have a little bit of an issue with comprehension in one subject.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 07:18 Report this comment
For example, I have a child who is a slow reader, yes his parents are crap or they'd have worked with him. Then again his dad is dead, and his mother works two jobs to keep them floating, I'm not sure she's really even had time to breathe in his life let alone teach her son to read. Through the special education program he has become a better reader and after two years he's in his final year of the program. I think that the "fat" could be trimmed down a lot and that whole process could be cheaper.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 07:24 Report this comment
Then you push on the example of who the school hires. Laws have changed, much of what could easily have been done by a janitor or support staff member is NOW required to be done by a "licensed professional" and good luck finding someone who wants to work at janitorial wages and do work that the law says isn't their job. Furthermore, good luck with the liability on it all. That part sadly I have to agree with troy on, it's a problem with unions, not the school union but the electrician's union, the plumber's union, and the likes. They're the ones who petition the government to make the laws stopping the average Joe from changing an outlet.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 07:28 Report this comment
So, after the laws get passed and a Janitor can no longer plunge a toilet (over exaggeration) the school districts found it was cheaper to higher someone on full time, and faster. I will mention when I was in high school at Salina Central we didn't have someone on staff full time for these jobs, which lead to a MAJOR issue when something happened. Salina isn't even that large of a city but sometimes a plumbing problem would be there for the entire school day. I'd hope at least that that part changes.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 07:28 Report this comment
I also looked into the maintenance building. The building is for the repairs to all of the vehicles that are used to drive students when buses aren't used. The vehicles used to transport people from one building to another, etc etc. I know when I went to Central we had probably 5 cars and 5 vans, so I imagine other schools have similar numbers of vehicles. I could see how this could require a building, however I can't imagine why they can't use a current building, or better yet pay the city to fix the vehicles.
THEENFORCER
Tuesday 16 October 2012 08:54 Report this comment
Been reading all of this and it seems DamiStac has an answer for every point brought up which reminds me of someone else that used to be on here. I read some information about the influx of special needs children. Our schools would occassionally run into some special needs children but lately the numbers have totally gone off the charts and why? Is it because the parents do not give a darn or is it something physical from birth and if so is research correct that its tied into parents drug usuage? I do agree with one thing that being these childrens parents need to pay anything in excess to what is spent on the none special needs child. It is not up to the state or taxpayers to take care of their children. Public schools are for teaching children now if a child needs special care then the parents should find that care in another facility and pay what is needed.
THEENFORCER
Tuesday 16 October 2012 09:01 Report this comment
I also question all the unnecessary jobs the school system has created and cannot believe that they are required by government to hane alot of these positions. If so then we need to elect people who will look into this and trim the fat. As for the maintance facility that is the biggest waste of money. Our taxes were raised because the school district is always begging for money and they blow millions on this building and for no reason. They could out source repair work to local shops and save the salaries that are going to be paid on top of the building costs and folks that is alot of repairing. If we were to trim all these unneeded jobs and buildings there would be plenty of monies available to give our childred great educations. We did not need all of this 30 years ago and do not need it now.
THEENFORCER
Tuesday 16 October 2012 09:08 Report this comment
Again alot of this goes back to the people we elect to the school boards. Salina has had some of the worst people serving on the boards in many years and all they wish to do is spend spend spend then tax tax tax. Its time people in our area wake up to this and demand they tighten their belt and stop the spending. They act like everyone that lives in Salina and Saline county are millionaires when most of us are struggling to keep our heads above the water in these tough times.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 16:43 Report this comment
THEENFORCER, not sure if I should take that as a compliment or an insult. I intend to respond to these types of conversations because I find that for me they're perhaps the only thing I hold most dear. I've never used another name on this site, and I've been around since it opened but with all the election stuff going on my political side is riled up. I would agree with you about trimming the fat, and frankly that's what most people have said on here, the discussion and debate comes down to what is fat, and what isn't. The maintenance building topic really does upset me because I really DO believe that for cheaper they could outsource it, plus it'd put money into our local economy and NOT take as much out of our pockets. I'm a Democrat so I'm sure I'll regret saying this, but we're half the problem. The Democrats tend to push for more and more education, however my reason for that push is because I know if I stop pushing the Republicans will kill it.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 16:47 Report this comment
Anyways! So, This isn't only happening in Salina, it's happening all across the state of Kansas as well as the nation. If you want to look at statistics KSDE(dot)org is a great resource for Kansas. It'll let you narrow down a lot of factors, the factor I look most into is poverty levels, but to answer your question regarding why are kids being labeled "special education" so much more frequently now? Well, there's more diagnosis, before a child like my best friend growing up could stumble from K to 7th grade without anyone ever realizing he had dyslexia, now we've got someone sounding the alarms when they are in daycare or at a preschool. Additionally, I do think medical care is part of it, I think a lot of women don't get the care they need when pregnant and it causes problems.
DamiStac
Tuesday 16 October 2012 16:48 Report this comment
Anyways, I could go on and on about the subject, as I said... something I'm super passionate about, however I'm sure no one cares to read anymore and I've had a long day dealing with kids so! I'll call it quits unless someone else wants to chat some more. :)
Iamgonnagetyou
Wednesday 17 October 2012 08:58 Report this comment
I guess if the parents had to pay you would be without a job. But if they took all the extra monies spent on special ed and matched it for each regular child they could get so much of a better education. Parents need to take responsibility for their child that is in this group of special education and not the rest of the taxpayers.
DamiStac
Thursday 18 October 2012 21:03 Report this comment
I see you want to talk about the subject more, so I'll be glad to address it. YES I would be out of a job, and I'm okay with that. I'm 100% okay with the idea of them revamping education and me being out of a job for the betterment of America, not just on a level of taxes but on a level of the children of the future we churn out. I honestly don't think dumping more money into the rest of students is going to make them smarter. If the government decided to cut spending for special ed out completely (which I think is a bad idea) then I would HOPE they'd just put it back into the economy via ta cuts. The issue with government spending on education is, they don't want to cut education, they don't want to cut anything.
DamiStac
Thursday 18 October 2012 21:07 Report this comment
They want to cut the budget then turn around and say "Now figure out where to cut spending. Now remember, you can't cut these areas, and you can't cut down Special education, and you cannot cut the costs of these tests, and... you can't cut anything else." That is the problem, they want to cut the budget but they won't make the hard decisions and cut it properly. As I've stated before as well, I bet you that if you told teachers "Here is your budget, now what do you need to cut to achieve that budget?" There would be cuts across the board, and good solid cuts that didn't somehow screw over the kids. I can almost also say they'd somehow figure out a way to cut their own salaries. (if need be)
DamiStac
Thursday 18 October 2012 21:09 Report this comment
Now, to address your comment about the parents again. You think parents WANT to be having special education kids? Do you think parents WANT their children to be autistic? Have OCD? Have down syndrome? Do you think those parents want that? How is this them needing to "take responsibility". Do you know what's going to happen if we leave parents to "take responsibility"? We will have the good hard working American parents bankrupting themselves trying to educate their child.
DamiStac
Thursday 18 October 2012 21:13 Report this comment
Then, we'll have the other not so great parents, or parents who don't have a dime in their pockets doing nothing. Or worse they'll just drop their kids into the public school system anyway. They'll drop them into classrooms for normal teachers to deal with them, which the teacher WILL try and teach them. The problem is, teaching them in a "normal" setting will slow down the rest of the children, which will in turn amount to the rest of the children getting less of an education. How do you force parents to do anything? Tell me, because I'd LOVE to force some of these parents to make their kids study at night, or make them help their children read better. You CAN'T either parents are great parents and they're going to bust their butts for their children, or they're crap parents and they're just going to go home, turn on the TV and let things ride. So your answer essentially boils down to, "Let the kids take responsibility for being born with problems, let the children suffer because they aren't perfect."
DamiStac
Thursday 18 October 2012 21:19 Report this comment
Then there's kids in my program that are just abused at home. For whatever reason they got the short end of the stick and not only was the child born with a disability, but their parents are cruel individuals and wanted to abuse them physically or mentally for it. How do we force those parents to pay for their child's education? I have an idea! Lets lock the parent up in jail, and then put the child into the foster system! Where the child will be a ward of the state and WE can pay for their child. Then on top of that we can pay for their parents too!