A gentleman by the name of Jack Wells, a frequent commenter on Kilroy’s Delaware, has been hammering at Red Clay Consolidated School District for years over their administrative costs. He makes my charter school financial stuff look weak in comparison! I tend to focus on the Department of Education’s finances, but one of the major complaints I hear in Delaware is how administrative costs are out of control. Every school district and charter school in Delaware should have a Jack Wells looking out for these types of things.
What has Mr. Wells upset right now? The Wilmington Education Improvement Commission redistricting plan. More specifically, the clause indicating the Red Clay board may raise taxes without a referendum…
- Chart 1 shows total state, federal and local funds received by the district during the period 2006/07 through 2013/14 as reported by our State’s Department of Education. {Excludes 2 special schools.}
- Chart 2 shows the same information for the period 2006/07 through 2015/16, figures for 2015/16 were taken from the districts 2015/16 Budget. {DDOE has not published revenue information since 2013-2014.}
% %
State Total Fed Local Total Total
116,745,319 54.82 14,604,025 81,607,040 38.32 212,956,384 2013/14
113,643,134 62.06 11,867,910 57,580,215 31.44 183,091,259 2006/07
3,102,185 10.38 2,736,115 24,026,825 80.45 29,865,125 Total Increase
119,089,298 53.44 11,747,926 92,107,040 41.33 222,844,264 2015/16
113,643,134 62.06 11,867,910 57,580,215 31.44 183,091,259 2006/07
5,446,164 13.70 {-} 219,984 34,526,825 86.85 39,753,005 Total Increase
These charts show that in 2006-2007 the state provided 62.06% of the revenue and the property owners provided 31.44%, eight years later the state was providing only 53.44 percent, property owners 41.33%, and the districts delinquent school taxes had skyrocketed. During this period the state cut funding to our schools while continuing to fund overhead in our districts and DDOE. The fact are clear, funding overhead is a priority over funding our schools.
In 2014 after property owners provided the district an additional $24,026,825, that represented 80.45 percent of the total increase in revenue. The Board than told community, if you do not approve increasing your current operating tax rate by 19.97 percent, we will have to terminate teachers, paraprofessionals, activities, etc., To prevent these cuts, the community approved increasing the tax rate, than the board voted to deny property owners the right to vote to raise the tax rate.
Chart two includes the additional $10.5 million received this year as a result of the rate increase, since the increased tax rate will be phrased in over 3 years, local revenue with continue to increase. Since the referendum was approved, the district built a new 600 student K-5 school, regular and special enrollment student declined, regular units decreased while special education Div. I Units increased. {Chart below shows changes in enrollment and units.}
Regular Units Special Units
Enrollment Earned Needs Earned
14,364 777 2175 309 2014
13,925 752 2169 321 2016
{-}439 {-} 25 {-} 6 12
When property owners provide 86.85 % of the total increase in revenue, and the Board still has insufficient revenue to provide funding for ELL and low income children, the board has a major problem. Rather than doing a review on how and where funds were being used by program, and than allocating funding by priority, the WEIC, the board and the boards Community Financial Review Committee recommended doing away with referendums and authorizing the board to raise taxes. NOW THAT IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS, SHOCKING.
I strongly oppose providing the Red Clay School Board authority to raised local taxes without a referendum and wonder why after the property owners provided 86.85% of all the additional revenue, they determined it was necessary to do away with referendums. NOW THAT IS VERY TROUBLING.
Jack Wells
As a taxpayer, I would find this very troubling. Charter school and DOE finances are tough enough to figure out, but Mr. Wells brings up many valid points concerning district funds and spending. I know Christina had to make a lot of sacrifices when their referendums didn’t pass last year. Teachers lost jobs or were sent to other schools. Some board members even turned in their district-paid cell phones last summer. But I also know there are several districts with folks making over $100,000 across the state. If the Every Student Succeeds Act actually does give more state and local control and less fed mandates, does this mean there would no longer be a need for so much district administration? Or would it actually increase? Dare I actually crack the yolk of district funding? I think Brian Stephan from Delaware Liberal (who is on the Citizens Budget Oversight Committee in the Christina School District) and Jack Wells should hold a forum on district spending!
I plan on sharing a lot of Mr. Well’s material (with his permission) since it is so brilliant! What do you think? I would love to hear from some district admins, especially in Red Clay, about their side of this. It is a conversation that is not going to go away. One big takeaway I have from all this is that Jack Markell can talk education all he wants, but in his administration, the percentage of funding to education has actually gone down percentage-wise. Jack Markell likes to talk big, but he leaves it up to the districts and yes, even the charters, to carry more of the financial burden for his (not-so) moments of brilliance.
The Season Of Myths 