Thread by @TracyNovick

#MaEdu, we are approaching an anniversary!
Remember this?

November 26, 2019

Boston English High School
signing of the Student Opportunity Act

The once-a-generation update on our commitment to our children, as is the constitutional duty of "legislatures and magistrates" #MAEdu

You might also remember my noting:
There was no money in the Student Opportunity Act.
It was a statement of intent, but the proof very much was to be in subsequent budgets.
#MAEdu

My first term on the Worcester School Committee I was called a Cassandra, and I fear I have lived up to that once again.

In any case, that brings us to FY21.

You might remember back in January, Sen @SoniaChangDiaz, @CAJLightning of @MassBudget, and others noting that Governor Baker's budget did not equally implement the #MAEdu low poverty increment.

Specifically, for the highest poverty #MAEdu districts, that looked like this:

(@worcesterpublic had a slide on this the first week of February, speaking of forewarned)

That, of course, was what many of us thought the coming budget tussles would be about--would the fact that the state increased the low income count for this year be considered a faithful implementation of that fourth piece of the SOA, or not?

And then this happened:

In the scramble over budget postponement and then finally getting something of a budget in July, I think we in #MAEdu lost track not only of that, but also what *was* in the Governor's budget.

The Governor's budget, after all, actually DID increase in the count of low income for many districts.
You might remember: it was to be the *higher* of either a district economically disadvantaged rate OR the FY16 % of low income students (back when that was free/reduced count)

That isn't in the budget that came out in July.

That isn't in the budget that Governor Baker proposed for the rest of this year, either.

So what does that mean?

I ran some numbers for the largest #MAEdu Gateway districts, who are to be (let's use a hopeful tense here) the biggest beneficiaries of the Student Opportunity Act.

Calculations could vary a bit based on what you assume/project, but this carries through the goal rates off the inflation of FY21.

Do remember (though I didn't run the "who pays" side) that the Gateways are just about always at a place in their calculations are picked up in Chapter 70, so losses here are state aid losses.

Here's the student count difference (in yellow; the full bar is total low income count)

and here follows what difference that makes

Springfield
$21,195,748

Worcester
$20,345,638

Brockton
$24,304,939

Lynn
$22,502,493

Lawrence
$20,229,034

Lowell
$11,601,756

Fall River
$7,772,790

New Bedford
$6,531,087

Chelsea
$15,765,454

Revere
$11,734,436

Everett
$9,797,033

Chicopee
$5,259,882

Holyoke
$4,154,716

Haverhill
$1,645,452

Framingham
$1,225,895

Taunton
$1,885,114

And a note not only for Gateways, but for all: the FY21 budget as currently proposed does not do *any* implementation of the Student Opportunity Act.

Two final words from me:

You will note, I hope, the direct overlap between the above districts and many of the worst hit cities of the pandemic.
This is not a coincidence.
The very things that make those districts in need of the assistance are what make their communities more vulnerable to the disease.

And:
School funding in Massachusetts includes an inflation rate. A loss to an increase in the base is not a loss for just that year. It is a loss FOREVER. Those funds are not simply lost now, but they are not built in next year to be built upon.

Thus the question before us, Massachusetts is:

Did we mean it last November or not?

#MAEdu #mapoli
/fin