Home > Uncategorized > State portion of school referendums

State portion of school referendums

February 10, 2012

Follow-up: News Journal confirms referendum funding gap, opens door to broader investigation

Update 2: Joanne and I have made peace. Joanne is awesome! I am going to move to Appo just so I can vote for her!!

*****

Update: Well look at this – I poked the state, and Appo screamed… I didn’t think there was that kind of relationship, but now I’m not so sure:

Joanne Christian, on February 13, 2012 at 8:33 pm said:

Well Mike O.–you are officially now a tool. The referendums described had NOTHING to do with any school programs–it is all bricks and mortar. And Appo is not going to referendum this year so far, because our growth has slowed down w/ the economy and we can take a breather in building. But go ahead, spread away your lack of knowledge in how all of this works and create an air of conspiracy models, and nefarious sub-plots in funding and further mislead the public in public education. Best to stick w/ what you know in getting your blog beyond Basic Enquirer edition.

 
I have my first hate mail! I’ve arrived!!
 
 
*****

While we’ve all been focusing on suburban and city parents in this Red Clay referendum, maybe we’ve taken our eye off the elephant in the room: the state contribution.

It turns out that in the 2009 Appoquinimink referendum, the state contributed $3 for every $1 from Appo. But for Red Clay’s current referendum, the state is contributing only $1.50 for every dollar from Red Clay.

Am I missing something that would explain the difference?

Perhaps if the state were to match Red Clay at the same rate as Appo, Red Clay could build the new suburban school AND afford to fund new programs in the city. Or something else that would be a step forward for both city and suburbs.

I was looking at the 2009 referendum in Appoquinimink. Really impressive stuff. You should go download the presentation, and make sure you go to the end and see the awesome architectural concept drawings, mostly for later phases, but still. And check out the aquatic center!

This was the “no tax increase” referendum, which was passed without actually raising taxes – mainly because of growth, and retirement of past debt. Oh, and also because the state provided three dollars for every one dollar Appoquinimink residents provided.

So then of course I looked at next month’s Red Clay referendum, and it turns out the state is only providing $1.50 for every dollar from Red Clay. Keep in mind Appo has an overall 21% rate of low-income students vs. 44% for Red Clay.


State Local Total State match per local dollar
Appo 2009 $48,486,900.00 $16,162,200.00 $64,649,100.00 $3.00
Red Clay 2012 $70,594,100.00 $47,062,800.00 $117,656,900.00 $1.50

So let me get this straight: Appo gets 3:1 state funding with NO tax increase, while Red Clay gets 3:2 state funding AND a tax increase. What were they was DDOE and the General Assembly thinking?

Advertisements
  1. February 10, 2012 at 6:50 am

    I have this constant sense every time I write a post that Kilroy has already done it six months ago.

  2. John Young
    February 10, 2012 at 9:39 am

    Who do you mean when you say “they”?

  3. February 10, 2012 at 10:00 am

    By “they” I mean “the state” – sorry if that was not clear. According to the current CN for the new Red Clay school, DDOE estimates the state share vs. the local share “pursuant to the bond bill.” So apparently it is worked out in advance between DDOE and Big Head types in the General Assembly. I’m not sure if there is a formula, or if it is just worked out in a smoke-filled room.

  4. kilroysdelaware
    February 12, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    Interesting post Mike! Perhaps the funding formula is different when talking construction of a new school compared to renovations? But did go back to Appo’s 2009 referendum and that one was a mixed bag , new school and other renovations. OK Mike ! Time to join the big league! Go ask! Start with the folks at Red Clay, They should be able to tell you.

  5. kilroysdelaware
    February 12, 2012 at 7:20 pm

    “I have this constant sense every time I write a post that Kilroy has already done it six months ago.”

    Nope ! This dilemma is all your’s! LOL !

  6. February 13, 2012 at 6:09 am

    One difference is that the Appo referendum included a land purchase as well (for future phases of the Appo school buildout). I wouldn’t be displeased if the State was taking the opportunity to grab some quasi-open space at a bargain price, before it gets gobbled up in the next wave of home or commercial development. I don’t know if that was the thinking though.

  7. John Young
    February 13, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    Appo did not scream. Joanne Christian screamed and she precisely disclosed the difference. From here previous post:

    “And of course, this is my opinion and not any official board/school district comment”

    gotta keep that stuff straight.

  8. John Young
    February 13, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    Appo did not scream. Joanne Christian screamed and she precisely disclosed the difference. From her previous post:

    “And of course, this is my opinion and not any official board/school district comment”

    gotta keep that stuff straight.

  1. February 11, 2012 at 3:28 am
  2. February 12, 2012 at 7:16 pm
  3. February 15, 2012 at 10:04 am
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: